A walk through the RBB corridor, a conversation with QueensWay advocates, and the MTA’s own projections make the case for the greenway harder to dismiss than I expected
I'm a big cycling fan, but I don't think that's a very effective olive branch--a bike path simply doesn't carry a lot of people relative to a rail line. Cycling is great, but it's not mass transit. Giving up right-of-way forever is a really bitter pill to swallow.
IMHO, the reason to support QueensLink is that the ridership is to a large degree under the city's control. If the current population can't sustain ridership, why not allow denser development in the area, and provide subsidies and regulatory relief to make it easier to build? We have to think in the long term on this one. NYC subway lines last for centuries; giving up this right-of-way simply because the park can be built 10 years faster is eating our seed corn, because opportunities to build new rail are almost nonexistent. Corridors like this one are a nonrenewable resource, and we should put this land to its highest and best use--adding to our transit network. The opportunity here is irreplaceable.
At the end of the day, both plans have their merits, so the one that can actually get done has my vote. As a Queens resident, better transit AND better parks would improve our borough, so I’ll take whichever one I can actually get.
Thank you for writing this! It's really cool you actually made it out to the tracks as part of the research for this piece.
Would Queensway be open to a bike lane? 😅 Could be a olive branch to transportation activists, if it makes sense and is safe.
I'm a big cycling fan, but I don't think that's a very effective olive branch--a bike path simply doesn't carry a lot of people relative to a rail line. Cycling is great, but it's not mass transit. Giving up right-of-way forever is a really bitter pill to swallow.
IMHO, the reason to support QueensLink is that the ridership is to a large degree under the city's control. If the current population can't sustain ridership, why not allow denser development in the area, and provide subsidies and regulatory relief to make it easier to build? We have to think in the long term on this one. NYC subway lines last for centuries; giving up this right-of-way simply because the park can be built 10 years faster is eating our seed corn, because opportunities to build new rail are almost nonexistent. Corridors like this one are a nonrenewable resource, and we should put this land to its highest and best use--adding to our transit network. The opportunity here is irreplaceable.
At the end of the day, both plans have their merits, so the one that can actually get done has my vote. As a Queens resident, better transit AND better parks would improve our borough, so I’ll take whichever one I can actually get.