top of page
NY & Rockaway Beach Railway

THE ROCKAWAY BEACH BRANCH

Written Comment

QueensLink  vs. The Correct Alternative

BEFORE THE TRANSPORTATION AND INFRASTRUCTURE COMMITTEE

NEW YORK CITY COUNCIL

NOVEMBER 18, 2024

________________________________________

Contents

Introduction .................................................................................................................

66th Avenue Buildings Requiring Demolition ................................................................

My Version of the Subway Connection ..........................................................................

SYSTRA, and the New QueensLink Plan ........................................................................

A Speedy Four-Track LIRR Connection..........................................................................

Glendale Junction.........................................................................................................

Glendale Junction Close-up..........................................................................................

Problems with Capital Planning....................................................................................

Glendale Close-up Continued........................................................................................

Conclusion...................................................................................................................

__________________________________________________________________

________________________________________

Anchor 1

For High Capacity and Frequent Scheduling to serve the Rockaways

the Rockaway Beach Branch has no peers, but it must be con-

nected to the LIRR at Rego Park to realize that potential,

and any EIS documentation should reflect that.

The best way to arrange for the quickest possible rail service to Rockaway Beach and Far Rockaway - with the highest capacity possible - is to rebuild the existing connection to the LIRR at Rego Park. I've been trying to convince both the MTA and QueensLink for some years that a four-track connection there would afford tremendous capacity and passenger draw, and be cheaper to build than any subway connection anyone could possibly devise.

 

Investing in capital improvements is supposed to target the biggest passenger draw, though it's not always done that way. For example, the East Side Access Project has resulted in the necessity to run about twice as many trains in order to serve two termini in Manhattan, yet currently the LIRR is only carrying about 80% of the passengers they did in 2019. The ridership will recover, but at that point train capacity and the ability to schedule convenient service will have become seriously strained owing to all the additional trains.

By building a four-track LIRR connection, and a new station at Rego Park, you can ultimately serve three sectors: Eastbound by way of Glendale Junction, making for six continuous tracks all the way to Jamaica; the Airport, diverging at Howard Beach; and the Rockaways, ultimately connecting through to West Hempstead and beyond. A seamless transfer point could be arranged at Mott Avenue, but the dwindling right-of-way for through service in Far Rockaway must be preserved.

 

The Rockaway Beach Branch has the breadth and capacity to handle all those services, plus the A-train: ultimately with new fixed-span bridges at Jamaica Bay. The bulk of AirTrain service would ultimately be switched to the Rockaway Beach Branch for a one-seat ride to the airport, originating at Grand Central Madison, and later from the Finacial Distrct Calatrava Oculus (under West Street, specifically) by way of Atlantic Avenue.

This is the correct way to husband the enormous capacity and utility of the Rockaway Beach Branch for our future passengers.

* * * * * * * * * *

Anchor 2
66th Avenue Buildings Requiring Demolition.png

66TH AVENUE BUILDINGS REQUIRING DEMOLITION
UNDER THE SYSTRA SUBWAY CONNECTION PLAN

The $800,000 study commissioned by the MTA from consultant SYSTRA gives a highly improbable layout for the subway connection. As illustrated in the SYSTRA document (above) the subway connection would take out thirteen buildings, eleven of them residential. Since the study appeared in 2019, the three commercial buildings on Queens Boulevard (left) have been demolished, and preparations are under way for new construction. The remaining buildings include: Four Large Apartment Blocks of 6, 7 and 9 stories, and six 3-story townhomes. (The number of stories given in the illustration is wrong; the apartment houses at right and left are 7 and 9 stories respectively.)

Anchor 3

MY VERSION OF THE SUBWAY CONNECTION

MY VERSION OF SUBWAY CONNECTION.png

In December of 2019 I sent QueensLink a copy of this Alternate Plan for the subway connection, along with a description explaining my reasoning for the revision. In the drawing, the eastbound leg (Green) - which was not built at the time of the subway's construction - would diverge from the subway just east of the 63rd Drive station under Queens Boulevard, and descend to a point under the westbound leg (Red) at the corner of 66th Avenue, thus avoiding demolition of two then-extant buildings on Queens Boulevard. The funeral home on the corner though, would have required removal in order to put the subway though, as would a substantial part of the already-built westbound leg of the subway connection. These modifications would have addressed the problems at the corner as far as possible, as well as those encountered at two of the apartment buildings noted above. But... THAT'S NOT ALL...

Rather than a tangent segment extending south (right) along 66th Avenue, varying degrees of contortion, to accommodate a big reverse curve required to avoid two apartment buildings on opposite sides of the LIRR tracks, would extend almost back to Queens Boulevard, commencing where the two legs separate from their "stacked" configuration near the corner there. The reverse curve is not the best, but with the unified fleet of B-Division cars now restricted in length to 60' it is certainly possible. The two 250-foot radius curves with an 80' tangent in between doesn't leave much space for speed or superelevation, but is possible to traverse at not-unreasonably-slow speed with the 60' cars. Perhaps the apartment block in close quarters to the right of the LIRR Main Line could be truncated or demolished. The Matawok Station is my idea, taken after another station of the same name that was located nearby. There are a couple of cross streets now dormant and semi-dormant to provide access, and the long curve adjacent makes for a good stopping place.

Anchor 4

SYSTRA, AND THE NEW QUEENSLINK PLAN

By contrast with the above, the SYSTRA drawing, rather than "outlining how the connecting tunnel could be built" - as QueensLink says on a page describing their current plans for the connection here - instead gives a very convincing argument for how the connecting tunnel could NOT be built. The SYSTRA drawing differs from the original circa-1930 plan in that it shows the already-built underpass of the connection, running beneath the Queens Boulevard Subway, along with its eastbound leg exiting at grade, as being moved back towards the southwest by varying degrees of 10 to 20 feet along the compass of its extent, which would be impossible. This, and the sometimes needless undermining of so many buildings along 66th Avenue, as laid out in the SYSTRA document, indicate that it was designed to make the connection look impossible. Whether or not this was done at the MTA's bidding I wouldn't know. (At the time, they had a pretty thorough-sounding system of oversight for producing the document aimed at protecting their interests.) The notion that the affected buildings along and near 66th Avenue could be saved by underpinning or "shoring them up" is not valid, because SYSTRA's grading scheme shows, for example, that the outbound track of the connection goes right through the foundation of the apartment building having above-ground basement windows on 66th Avenue, between Saunders and Booth. This is due to the elevation of the planned "receiving pit" where excavation for the tunnel would start, with the proposed subway line having two 3% grades descending from either side of the receiving pit as planned, with the receiving pit being located near Booth Street. You can't go though all those buildings as indicated and leave them there. It was probably decided by SYSTRA that locating the launch site any deeper (to eliminate the steep grades) would have resulted in risking too much disturbance to existing buildings. By contrast, using the Shield Method customary in the 1930s would eliminate the two 3% grades to some extent, and allow commencing the excavation from the bellmouth at the existing part of the connection, which might result in cost savings as well. That way, the tunnel might stay generally centered under 66th Avenue, without extreme grades unless they're needed to avoid existing sub-surface structures.

QueensLink's new design - though longer and therefore probably not any faster than my version - takes advantage of the added length along Queens Boulevard - combined with higher ground elevation at the planned underpass - to achieve a deeper elevation at the point of crossing than exists at the 66th Avenue site. (of course the deeper you go the father the disturbance spreads) This might allow the new crossing to be built using tunnel boring machines, though I can't picture it getting done without interrupting service under Queens Boulevard: they seem to find every excuse. Special boring machines are required to build tunnels with curves like the ones shown, which can't be used for the straight parts, though in some circumstances they can be rented, or bought second hand. The 6-story 1950s apartment building on the south would have to be dealt with. I don't know if that would require vacating it, or if so, whether the owner would want to rebuild, which might be advantageous. The East Side Access project 'broke new ground' so to speak, by tunneling through very deep rock under high rise buildings. The length of this alignment doesn't permit the vertical freedom to do that, and bedrock is about 250' down anyway, though bedrock in the immediate area of the two crossing lines would probably result in more disturbance to the subway rather than less. There are also a few low-slung saltbox row houses lining the old Rockaway Beach Branch that would be passed under. The ground level gets lower as you go south, and the projected line goes right through the two Little League diamonds just north of Fleet Street, which are the most actively kept up. Though restrictions there would probably be short lived, post-construction vibrations - there, and at the passed-under houses - if not sounds, would probably be perceptible, whereas with the 66th Street alignment - and even the four-track LIRR expansion - there would likely be no interference: the old alignment does not pass through the playing fields, though the LIRR would run quite close to the third one, but that could be easily mitigated. Finally, there would be no Matawok station as a kind of  bribe to benefit the Little League and their fans.

Anchor 5

COMPARE THE TORTURED SUBWAY ALIGNMENT TO

THIS SPEEDY FOUR-TRACK LIRR CONNECTION

WHITEPOT.png

The four-track format was no doubt anticipated when this canyon of a grade-separated connection was introduced circa 1930. At the same time the LIRR Main Line was widened to six tracks running west to Elmhurst, with now-vacant girder bridges to accommodate Tracks 1 and 6 located at 51st Avenue, 57th Avenues, the Long Island Expressway, Woodhaven Boulevard and 63rd Drive. Thus the side tracks could be made to exit the Main Line here without necessity of any track switches. Overall, its characteristics would make construction of this high-capacity interlocking a lot less expensive than that of any possible subway connection having even so, significantly lower capacity and speed.(About half as to capacity, and worse as to speed.)

 

In the four-track configuration shown at lower right, the below-grade Rockaway Beach Branch would run south to and generally through Glendale Junction (see below) before emerging to the open air, and so the QueensWay folks would hopefully be appeased. The Rego Park station as shown is located at 63rd Drive - a five minute walk from the subway station having the same street name - and has had an additional stair added for access at 63rd Avenue, whereas its earlier incarnation had only the stair on the south side. (outbound: the side with fewer steps) I believe that provision of elevators at the 63rd Avenue entrances would be considered legally not "practicable" for ADA purposes, though small lifts might be appropriate if they could be secured. The ability to differentiate fare-paying passengers digitally for that purpose is always improving. The platforms are shown as being 850' long, and could be expanded to a thousand or more, but would require further entrance accommodations including ADA accessibility, in case the area in question to the west is redeveloped sometime.

GLENDALE JUNCTION

Anchor 6
GLENDALE JUNCTION.png

The Glendale Junction station has two platform levels, with the topmost track in the picture being the inbound track from Jamaica, approaching by way of the Montauk Branch though Forest Park to the upper platform level, and crossing over the inbound track from Rockaway at lower left. The platform of this inbound track from Jamaica forms a balcony opposite the track, within the pie-shaped enclosure of the station. Across the station enclosure, the (purple) inbound track from Rockaway is shown at the lower platform level, this being the main level within the station. The balcony platform is connected by three underground bridges, one being circular and having stairs to both the surface and down to the main level. Another bridge, at the outside edge of the pie (right) has two stairs to the main (lower) level, and an elevator running between the main level and the bridge only. Two of the bridges are completely underground; the middle one has a low, above-ground dome extending over the stairs to the surface and the circular ramp. The third bridge is at the point of the pie slice, at left. All three of these bridges extend across the main level - and the inbound station track from Rockaway - to one of two open-air platforms between which the two outbound tracks of the Rockaway Beach Branch run. Exiting from one of these two outbound tracks at right, the eastbound track to Jamaica (and Richmond Hill) diverges by way of the station's only track switch. All four platforms are just over 1000' long.

​​​​​​

​The drawing shows six elevators: three at and near the north ends of three platforms (left) and two at the central, doughnut-shaped bridge and stair landing. A sixth elevator is shown behind the two stairs giving onto the main level from the curved bridge, or balcony, at the right edge of the pie enclosure. A seventh elevator would be located within Queens Metropolitan High School, to keep it secure, and the double sets of stairs in front of the school should be securable from both street level and from the platform: the platform being accessible also from the central part of the station.

​​

Three tracks run south from the station towards the Rockaways. Their new below-grade configuration - necessary to avoid the Forest View Apartments parking lot (not shown) - would obviate the extreme vertical alignment that Union Turnpike is subjected to in order to get under the Rockaway Beach Branch tracks passing over on a bridge. (Union Turnpike is shown at far right, beyond Stop & Shop and its multi-level parking lot.) Instead, Union Turnpike would run at a more-or-less even grade - thereby eliminating time consuming walking by pedestrians over elevated switchback bridges to accomplish vertical extremities - with the tracks passing unobtrusively below the road and adjacent sidewalks. Both of the existing railroad bridges flanking the new station along the Rockaway Beach Branch would have to be removed in order to build this new below-grade configuration.

GLENDALE JUNCTION CLOSE-UP

Anchor 7
Glendale Jct. Close-up.png

Since spiky spiral stair sheds are déclassé - as well as being inherently fragile - some sort of low dome would probably be best suited for covering the doughnut landing and stairs leading to the top, with the dome extending to some extent of the two wide stairways leading to the main level. The dome should admit as much light as possible, as against the rest which ought to support surface activity - BUT NOT A PARKING LOT - as I am against pandering to car owners leaving their cars parked at train stations all day* - at least in this area - as it would downgrade it. (I didn't draw in the columns needed to support the said surface activity including vehicles, but it's pretty easy to surmise where they would go.) This Description Continued Below

PROBLEMS WITH CAPITAL PLANNING

Anchor 8

​*I had hoped to design a large parking lot/mall and elevated dining pleasure dome - with roof garden, to sit and watch the trains go by - at White Pot Junction (the junction on the Main Line at Rego Park from which the Rockaway Beach Branch diverges) ...where airport passengers might choose to park there cars for months at a time - for a fee - payable to the MTA, given reversal of the law that prohibits them from engaging in non-transit-related development. Development both there and at Jamaica could produce substantial revenue for transit. But the powers in change have deprecated almost all the means of station access that once existed at White Pot (White Pot Junkpile) by selling them off to developers, most recently about 2018 - getting the new building so close to the tracks it impacts access, which is still necessary even absent the Rego Park station and luxury parking complex being located at the junction proper. The time-before-that was about 2003, with an 8-story apartment building now blocking the street where it used to say "railroad access" or words to that effect on the tax map.

​​​

There is a tendency, deliberate on some level, of the MTA to deprecate their own property, notably affecting the Rockaway Beach Branch, but also the Main Line going east from Jamaica, where it was planned until fairly recently to have six continuous tracks all the way to Floral Park: hence the island platforms. ...and four tracks going east from there, where they just "upgraded it" to three - spaced 15' apart "for safety's sake" - with that ridiculous and oppressive grade configuration at Mineola, out of the 19th Century - AND YET NO GRADE-SEPARATED CONNECTION TO THE OYSTER BAY BRANCH!

​​​​

And they're playing it to the hilt: having outbound Oyster Bay trains cross the inbound express track at ten-miles-an-hour on the bolt-straight, three-track high iron west of Mineola, and then stop at the inbound platform before proceeding onto the Oyster Bay Branch - as if directional conflicts like that are as good at one end as at the other on a  $3,000,000,000 "Upgrade" in the 21st Century. This is by way of complaining about the 'stupid old obsolete Long Island Railroad'. But THEY'RE the ones who are MAKING it obsolete. And this play-acting state of affairs will be permanent, as they have removed the outbound track of the Oyster Bay Branch that used to serve the eastbound track on the main line, scrunching up its curve to connect to the north mainline track only, so the two tracks of the branch are connected to just the one inbound track. (In earlier times the end of the eastbound platform was back further to the west, to give trains a running start in order to clear the old street-and-rail grade crossing quickly.)

​​

​​​​​The quasi-historical Mineola stationhouse was set back 40 feet or so from the centerline of the nearest track (still is) in anticipation of expansion, yet someone has compelled them to built these cramped, ten-foot-wide platforms. It stinks. And it's not necessary.  But the Central Branch (Hempstead and east) should have been developed first! ...to connect with the Babylon and Montauk lines going east from Farmingdale. Then you'd have four tracks right off the bat, with two to play around with.


The MTA has now bricked the six tracks going east from Jamaica: first by allowing the AirTrain-Terminal-and-LIRR-Central-Control to needlessly box in the tracks at Jamaica, along with the absurd Platform F opened last year, which will lead to permanent capacity problems: because it blocks off two of the through-tracks. And this will make cross-platform transfers difficult if not impossible. ...even with the idiotic and exorbitantly expensive flyover now under construction, which will only feed more trains though the platforms, rather than diverting them to the (formerly three) through-tracks on the south as it should. Without this vandalism at Jamaica we'd have had five through tracks there before long. There's plenty of room if you don't deliberately box it in. That's what Platform F is about. (See this video on on topic: Jamaica Capacity "IMPROVEMENTS")

This type of vandalism also extends east to the new station called "Elmont-USB Arena" (though it's nowhere near there) with their funny publicity stunt of jacking up the 95-year-old Cross Island Parkway bridge and moving it over to accommodate the station, but at the same time failing to preserve the six-track configuration necessary for smooth-and-fast functioning of the railroad. The number of tracks there is now restricted to four, as a state of practical permanence.


Both the White Pot Junction development - and a big business center or something on existing railroad property at Jamaica - could still eventually be developed, if this kind of garbage could be turned around quickly through proper oversight. The White Pot Junction space could be accessed at either end of the long, curved junction station, by cars entering between the tracks and passing under them, in addition to routes for pedestrians entering from the platforms and elsewhere.

________________________________________

Anchor 9

Glendale Close-up Continued

The above drawing shows, as well as currently possible, the interface between the three underground bridges/balconies and the easternmost of the open-air platforms. It's important to note that the inbound track from Rockaway passes though the station alongside a basement-level outside wall opposite the platform (not shown) with the nearest of the open-air platforms extending over that wall, by which it is supported. There should be a dividing wall upside, on the inside edge of the open-air platform, which would be cantilevered somewhat over the loading gauge of the lower station track, and consist as much as possible of glass or light-admitting material, to let more natural light into the station. Also, any extensive shed over the easternmost open-air platform would have the effect of blocking that light, so the shed must extend only enough from the top of the glass wall (if it does so extend) to protect waiting passengers from the rain. (or else be clear) - because passengers could always go in and wait on one of the three commodious balconies giving onto the platform  ...with doors in between of course.


The tennis and badminton courts (one of each, showing as reddish-brown in both pictures) belonging to the school and displaced by the stairs to the doughnut landing and its two elevators, could be made to fit nicely in the triangular area on the opposite side of the school (blacktop or similar) as that area is actually larger than the present one. Besides the two railroad bridges, they would be the only things displaced by construction of the station.


Them and the crazy aerial switchback ramps - to accommodate any pedestrian willing to tolerate it - now existing along Union Turnpike. The switchback ramps could be left, or rebuilt in some other form if the residents of the nearby houses and apartments should prefer it, and Union Turnpike might be differentiated vertically from their parallel residential street called Union Turnpike Service Road, by locating the main road slightly lower than the service road to afford some privacy: versus the present vertical alignment which is fully three stories below at in some places, necessitating a thick old concrete fence to separate their road from Union Turnpike.

________________________________________

Anchor 10

Sorry: nothing in the above paragraph is shown in either of the drawings, but this design for the Rockaway Beach Branch is going to be continued, and will include a station at Jamaica Avenue (exploratorily) and another one just past Atlantic Avenue, to eventually accommodate AirTrains entering from the Financial District. This station just south of Atlantic Avenue would necessarily be located underground due to considerations of grade and distance affecting the connection from the Atlantic Avenue Line, thus providing the QueensWay folks with large amounts of additional below-grade fodder for their on-the-surface plans. Also included will be the six-track configuration south of Liberty Avenue (yes, that's possible) and the connection to the airport probably in two versions, as well as a scheme, already sketched out, for running LIRR trains along to a transfer point at Mott Avenue for service to West Hempstead, and eventually beyond - in order to permanently end the ridiculous back-track to Far Rockaway which goes several miles out of the way, and which the MTA has been at pains to make permanent, by not looking after their right-of-way in Far Rockaway. Far Rockaway is developing quickly though, so (FOR ONCE) the right-of-way must be preserved. (They would have to know were to put it first though.) All of this should be available here before the hoped for EIS gets under way.​​​​​

Bruce W. Hain                                                                                                               November 29, 2024

 

BACK TO INDEX PAGE

PayPal ButtonPayPal Button

If you want your comment to appear on Facebook, click the box next to "Also post on Facebook" at lower

left. (It doesn't show up till you click or enter text in the text box.)

bottom of page