$1.7B streetcar route desired for Brooklyn-Queens waterfront

[anday]

$1.7B streetcar route desired for Brooklyn-Queens waterfront

The booming Brooklyn-Queens waterfront is primed for a $1.7 billion streetcar route, according to a detailed proposal obtained by the Daily News.

A study commissioned for a nonprofit called the Friends of the Brooklyn Queens Connector — whose members include transit experts, community leaders and business giants like Doug Steiner of Steiner Studios, investor Fred Wilson of Union Square Ventures and Helena Durst of the Durst Organization real estate firm — envisions sleek streetcars zipping through 10 neighborhoods along the 17-mile stretch of waterfront land between Sunset Park and Astoria.

The Brooklyn Queens Connector is aimed at linking neighborhoods to new job hubs outside of the Manhattan-centric subway system as the waterfront adds new residential buildings and office space. The study estimates 15.8 million passengers a year in 2035.

“Too much of the city is underserved by our transit system, and we need to be looking at ideas like this to create a 21st century network,” said Jill Eisenhard, director of the Red Hook Initiative community group and a member of the nonprofit supporting a tram.

Mitchell Moss, director of NYU’s Rudin Center for Transportation Policy and Management, said the Brooklyn waterfront is going through a “renaissance” but needs better transit options to spread the benefits.

“This is a brilliant way to tie together several different areas, which offer jobs, which offer housing, which offer recreation,” said Moss, who is unaffiliated with the group.

Despite the $1.7 billion price tag and an estimated $26 million a year tab to run the tram, the planners believe the streetcar is financially viable. It would bring in $3.7 billion of new tax revenue, “generating more than enough value to pay for its own construction,” according to the study.

The report concludes ground could break on the project as early as 2019.

In the meantime, the Friends of the Brooklyn Queens Connector will have to build support for the ambitious transit project.

The de Blasio administration appeared willing to consider the streetcar.

“We're always open to new ideas that can help build the 21st century transportation system New Yorkers deserve,” said Wiley Norvell, spokesman for de Blasio.

http://www.nydailynews.com/new-york/...icle-1.2486682

[hunser]

Street cars are the best! I love them. Let's hope this will be built.

[Crawford]

This route would really be best with a new subway line. I think it would generate sufficient ridership.

Unfortunately, given the enormous costs of subway expansion in NYC, light rail is probably the best way to go with this potential route.

[Swede]

Originally Posted by Crawford

This route would really be best with a new subway line. I think it would generate sufficient ridership.

Unfortunately, given the enormous costs of subway expansion in NYC, light rail is probably the best way to go with this potential route.

A few tweaks so the it runs a more straight line and it'd make for a potentially smart subway line.
Alternatively: keep it as a streetcar and add more stops. Turn it into a local transit option for everywhere along the waterfront.
This proposal seems to be trying to do both things at once. Not a good idea.

[C.]

So... when has it made sense to run a streetcar along a waterfront? Wouldn't it make more sense to run it a 1/4 to 1/2+ a mile inland to increase the number of potential riders within walking distance of stops?

[Crawford]

Originally Posted by CIA

So... when has it made sense to run a streetcar along a waterfront? Wouldn't it make more sense to run it a 1/4 to 1/2+ a mile inland to increase the number of potential riders within walking distance of stops?

It is inland. That's the point.

The Brooklyn waterfront has mostly been rezoned for high density residential, but the problem is that there are no subway stops. So you have 30-50 floor towers going up in Williamsburg and Greenpoint, but it's a huge hike to the subway.

And the existing subway infrastructure is some of the most overburdened in the city. The L train is a disaster at rush hour. North Brooklyn, especially, needs more rail capacity.

[C.]

Originally Posted by Crawford

It is inland. That's the point.

The Brooklyn waterfront has mostly been rezoned for high density residential, but the problem is that there are no subway stops. So you have 30-50 floor towers going up in Williamsburg and Greenpoint, but it's a huge hike to the subway.

And the existing subway infrastructure is some of the most overburdened in the city. The L train is a disaster at rush hour. North Brooklyn, especially, needs more rail capacity.

Busy Bee and Crawford, that's fair I guess I was zeroing in on the area around Brooklyn Heights, which looks like it runs right next to parks along the water. I haven't seen the detailed map. Crawford, you bring up an interesting point about subway capacity. Will most riders of this streetcar transfer to subway lines into Manhattan like the L? It would be interesting to see a planning study of where the new residents of Williamsburg and Greenpoint will be working. If a decent percent of them is downtown Brooklyn, there good be a real opportunity here. If it's Manhattan, then the alignment needs to somehow needs to spur into Manhattan or it will further lead to overcrowding of existing lines.

The streetcar also looks like it's running in mixed traffic based on the renderings. Ideally, this needs to be in its own ROW.

[ChargerCarl]

This proposal is insane.

[antinimby]

Originally Posted by ChargerCarl

This proposal is insane.

How so?

[ChargerCarl]

Originally Posted by antinimby

How so?

Because busses are just as effective and much cheaper.

[C.]

Would love to see cost-benefit analysis of bus, BRT, LRT, and subway proposals. What would be the ridership of the different modes?

There is a long running belief in transit planning that there is a stigma attached to buses; Transit riders prefer rail. There is also positive land use benefits that are well documented when comparing bus to rail systems; transit-oriented development is strongly attracted to rail transit.

The questions that need to be answered as part of the environmental assessment are these: what are the costs of the different modes? What is the additional ridership that will be attracted by a rail system vs bus system. Which system would best promote land-use and other goals? What is the most cost effective mode with the most benefits? Stick an unbiased engineering firm on it as part of the environmental assessment to answer these questions. I have no idea what the final outcome would be, but I would be excited to read the report.

Personally, a Brooklyn-Queens waterfront streetcar sounds great, but it needs to connect to major employment center or transportation hub in Manhattan, otherwise it risks being just another tourist or G line. My two cents...

[UrbanImpact]

Originally Posted by ChargerCarl

Because busses are just as effective and much cheaper.

Overall buses are not as effective for the riders and surrounding neighborhoods as rail based systems.

Rail systems surpass (where viable) buses with ridership, overall experience, property values, jobs, etc.

[Busy Bee]

The route should travel on Manhattan avenue for several blocks and jump Newton Creek on a new transit/pedestrian bridge not be routed over Pulaski/11th.

The route is way too zigzaggy. I understand the desire to situate it as close to the waterfront as possible but the single direction routings is all too much. Would a predestrianized Kent be possible with two tracks running center? People need to remember that the more hairpin 90° turns a streetcar/tram makes the slower the travel time will become.

Also this doesn't need it's own thread. It's not an official government proposal, it's not really a serious proposal at all as much as I like the general premise. Put this is the NY transit thread.

[mrnyc]

Originally Posted by Busy Bee

The route should travel on Manhattan avenue for several blocks and jump Newton Creek on a new transit/pedestrian bridge not be routed over Pulaski/11th.

The route is way too zigzaggy. I understand the desire to situate it as close to the waterfront as possible but the single direction routings is all too much. Would a predestrianized Kent be possible with two tracks running center? People need to remember that the more hairpin 90° turns a streetcar/tram makes the slower the travel time will become.

Also this doesn't need it's own thread. It's not an official government proposal, it's not really a serious proposal at all as much as I like the general premise. Put this is the NY transit thread.

i had already put it in the ny transit thread prior to this one beng made.

[miketoronto]

This is not a transportation project. This is a development project with all the trappings of the obsession with streetcars as the new development tool for urban regeneration.

If this group was serious about transportation in this corridor they would be pushing for rapid transit. A slow running 17 mile streetcar is going to do nothing for improving access and transportation in this area.

[Busy Bee]

It isn't literally on the waterfront. In Williamsburg and Greenpoint it would run on Kent which is soon to be lined with tens of thousands of housing units so it will run where people are.

[Minato Ku]

1.7 billion for a streetcar.
This is rather expensive.

[Busy Bee]

^Curious what you think RATP could build a comparible 17 mile (27.5km) line from scratch (including power systems, storage& maintenance facilities, vehicles, etc.) for? I doubt the number is that far off.

What was the budget for the longest., most complex of the T lines?

[tdawg]

As someone who lives near the proposed northern terminus in Astoria, I think this is a fantastic idea, especially if it runs along Vernon Boulevard, which is booming from Hunters Point up to near Astoria Park. Given the new student population that will be living on Roosevelt Island at Cornell Tech and the two massive projects proposed in Astoria (Halletts and Astoria Coves), I can see ridership being massive. I loathe ever going to Greenpoint and Wiliamsburg simply because there is no easy way to get there by transit.

[Minato Ku]

Originally Posted by Busy Bee

^Curious what you think RATP could build a comparible 17 mile (27.5km) line from scratch (including power systems, storage& maintenance facilities, vehicles, etc.) for? I doubt the number is that far off.

What was the budget for the longest., most complex of the T lines?

Paris tram lines are not really comparable with american streetcars, they are more segregated and have more infrastructures (every line are built from scratch because none shares infrastructures)
You should note even if the whole T3 project (line T3a and line T3b) may have a similar price, it carries 100 million passengers yearly, much more than what is estimated for the waterfront streetcar.

I find the price of 1.7 billion for a simple streetcar mixed with traffic and carrying (a bit) less passengers than the busiest bus line of New York City, a bit too expensive.