Yes, dodged a bullet. Would have been the precedent for building over Sunnyside Railyards, etc. Do we want thousands of people living over a vulnerable railyard? Think about it. Do we want megaprojects or a livable city?
All trainyards are terror targets. You take out the yard, you take out part of the system, you destroy NYC's economy. Having schools and apartment buildings on top of that is not a wise idea.
How about the fact that we really didn't need a project the size of Atlantic Yards or Willets Point plunked down at the edge of the park on top of a railyard?
The location of the project would have turned it into a financial and engineering disaster.
It sits at the head of Willow Lake, surrounded by wetlands. To keep the water out, would have required a bethtub-style solution similar to the World Trade Center.
"All trainyards are terror targets. You take out the yard, you take out part of the system, you destroy NYC's economy. Having schools and apartment buildings on top of that is not a wise idea.
We really have to explain this to you?"
There are apartments and schools next to all sorts of high profile targets. Should we tear them all down? This sort of attack was not a concern in the 70s when this design was drawn up.
More evidence that Crapper's thinking lacks nuance. Building big in Jamaica would NOT be a precedent for building over Sunnyside yards. They're two totally different sites.* Jamaica is a transit-linked rail terminus - perfect location for development - and Sunnyside has abysmal transit connections and abuts a major change in topography.
That was not a bullet dodged, but an opportunity missed. If anyplace deserves to be more densely built, it is Jamaica. Reason number one is that it's a major transit hub. Reason number two is bidirectional transit flow. As things stand, subways running TO Jamaica in the morning are practically deadheading. Locating jobs there, and giving people a reason to commute OUTward from Manhattan, is a good thing. It relieves pressure from the one-directional transit flow, and it provides MTA with more revenues. You know, so they don't have to charge us all more to run empty trains out to Jamaica in the morning.
This project was not proposed for the Jamaica rail terminal, but rather over the Jamaica subway yards which are not especially convenient to mass transit. It is a swampy area cut off by major highways, that is why it was only chosen for a rail yard in the first place.
Most of the mega projects built in NYC in the outer boroughs back then have struggled ever since so I find it hard to understand why anyone would see this as a missed opportunity.
They have in fact been building up density in downtown Jamaica, starting more than 20 years ago with the new York college campus and the Addabbo federal building.
Italicized passages and many of the photos come from other websites. The links to these websites are provided within the posts.
Why your neighborhood is full of Queens Crap
"The difference between dishonest and honest graft: for dishonest graft one worked solely for one's own interests, while for honest graft one pursued the interests of one's party, one's state, and one's personal interests all together." - George Washington Plunkitt
The above organizations are recognized by Queens Crap as being beneficial to the city as a whole, by fighting to preserve the history and character of our neighborhoods. They are not connected to this website and the opinions presented here do not necessarily represent the positions of these organizations.
The comments left by posters to this site do not necessarily represent the views of the blogger or webmaster.
23 comments:
Dodged a bullet? I think that would have been pretty cool.
Yes, dodged a bullet. Would have been the precedent for building over Sunnyside Railyards, etc. Do we want thousands of people living over a vulnerable railyard? Think about it. Do we want megaprojects or a livable city?
Why is a railyard vulnerable?
It's a creative use of space, which is limited in this town. Better to build over a railyard than a park.
Terrorism. Duh.
Building over railyards - another way to reward developers at taxpayer expense.
Terrorism? That makes no sense.
a.) Someone could drive a truck bomb up to any apartment building if they want to blow it up.
b.) A relatively small suitcase bomb on a train would not do significant damage to a building above it.
c.) Trains in the yard have no passengers so blowing one up would be pointless.
All trainyards are terror targets. You take out the yard, you take out part of the system, you destroy NYC's economy. Having schools and apartment buildings on top of that is not a wise idea.
We really have to explain this to you?
How about the fact that we really didn't need a project the size of Atlantic Yards or Willets Point plunked down at the edge of the park on top of a railyard?
The location of the project would have turned it into a financial and engineering disaster.
It sits at the head of Willow Lake, surrounded by wetlands. To keep the water out, would have required a bethtub-style solution similar to the World Trade Center.
Remember this project well.
It would have turned into the same mess as the projects in the Bronx.
And the fumes from the rail yards below!
Never understood why it was called Jamaica Yard, not really in Jamaica. It's right between Forest Hills, Kew Garden Hills.
Either way, it would have ruined the look of the park, not that the parks dept hasn't done that itself with its neglect of it.
Glad you posted this!
Came across it by accident but though it was interesting.
Amazing what would have been.
this would have been very good for queens
AND can you imagine Manes' Grand Prix zooming around those buildings?
this would have been very good for queens
Sniff Sniff
Clueless troll!!!
Nothing like a project built on a swamp and ringed by superhighways, just like the highly successful Co-op City in the Bronx.
Had this been built, Forest Hills could have been bracketed by LeFrak City on the west and this on the east.
What a missed opportunity.
yeah, i much prefer the vibrant neighborhood it is now
None of you "whattayameandodgedabullet?"'s actually drive on the LIE, Grand Central, and Van Wyck right now, do you? TRAFFIC TRAFFIC TRAFFIC
"All trainyards are terror targets. You take out the yard, you take out part of the system, you destroy NYC's economy. Having schools and apartment buildings on top of that is not a wise idea.
We really have to explain this to you?"
There are apartments and schools next to all sorts of high profile targets. Should we tear them all down? This sort of attack was not a concern in the 70s when this design was drawn up.
More evidence that Crapper's thinking lacks nuance. Building big in Jamaica would NOT be a precedent for building over Sunnyside yards. They're two totally different sites.* Jamaica is a transit-linked rail terminus - perfect location for development - and Sunnyside has abysmal transit connections and abuts a major change in topography.
That was not a bullet dodged, but an opportunity missed. If anyplace deserves to be more densely built, it is Jamaica. Reason number one is that it's a major transit hub. Reason number two is bidirectional transit flow. As things stand, subways running TO Jamaica in the morning are practically deadheading. Locating jobs there, and giving people a reason to commute OUTward from Manhattan, is a good thing. It relieves pressure from the one-directional transit flow, and it provides MTA with more revenues. You know, so they don't have to charge us all more to run empty trains out to Jamaica in the morning.
*And even if they WERE comparable sites, so what?
To the previous commenter;
This project was not proposed for the Jamaica rail terminal, but rather over the Jamaica subway yards which are not especially convenient to mass transit. It is a swampy area cut off by major highways, that is why it was only chosen for a rail yard in the first place.
Most of the mega projects built in NYC in the outer boroughs back then have struggled ever since so I find it hard to understand why anyone would see this as a missed opportunity.
They have in fact been building up density in downtown Jamaica, starting more than 20 years ago with the new York college campus and the Addabbo federal building.
"More evidence that Crapper's thinking lacks nuance."
More evidence that you lack geographical knowledge of Queens.
Go get a map and a clue.
Here's a map for the geographically challenged.
Post a Comment