Jump to content
Attention: In order to reply to messages, create topics, have access to other features of the community you must sign up for an account.


Veteran Member
  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

7 Neutral

Profile Information

  • Location

Recent Profile Visitors

188 profile views
  1. Would it be possible to have the stop at the local platforms, and build a structure connecting those tracks to the express tracks before the rises from the lower level? (If that makes sense) Alternatively, would it be possible to have the be local on 8th Av and have the and another service be express? This would make 50th at least more palatable. My concern with 57th is just how Phase 3 SAS would connect, at least since I think there should be a station around 60th - 63rd Sts to connect the with 59th St station complex, and the other station would then be around 50th St, connecting to the at 53rd St. Though I suppose the station could be located around 55th, it would be very close to a 61st (ish) St station. Maybe that's preferable though and an argument for 57th St. Also, regarding the , I've imagined the going up Crescent St after Court Sq, connecting at Queensboro Plaza, and then turning West along Queens Plaza N, then turning North to connect to the at 21st St - Queensbridge. If you were to continue the up 21st St and then into Manhattan, I think it should go along 86th St rather than 125th St. I think 125th St could be served by the Triboro.
  2. How easy would it be to convert 50th St on 8th Av into an express station, and have the as the 8th Av express lines? Thinking about this with regard to a 50th St line.
  3. I was just wondering, why it is that they decided to build the tunnel on 63rd St as opposed to 61st St, where, it would be able to connect to the Broadway lines and the Lexington lines?
  4. How much would something like that cost? Presumably more than the Jay St - Metrotech Connection which was shorter and something like $150 million? Or was that cost mainly because of station renovation? I also wonder if there are better transfers that could be constructed or station upgrades for that kind of money.
  5. How long of an in-station transfer is still useful? I think we'd agree the connection to the to the rest of Times Sq is too far, but would a connection from the at 50th St to the at 7th Av be within the realm of feasibility? Likewise, would connecting the at 57th St - 7th Av to the at 7th Av be too far? These are connections that I suppose can be made at Times Sq, after the renovation, but it would be less of a walk, and would improve the 's role as a crosstown line. Is it just not worth the money? Maybe it is?
  6. Idk if you just were talking about the route initially being an extension of the but I'd point out that a subway connecting to LGA should go to Manhattan since that's where most people flying in would want to go. That being said a transfer would not be the end of the world, though if you are catering to air passengers, having a multi-level transfer with luggage would likely be a pain. That being said, it is an interesting proposal for sure.
  7. Is it a crazy idea to just have more shuttles sort of like what is done on weekends? As in the would end at Myrtle Av, the Dyre Av Branch of the at 180th St, the just being a shuttle from Lenox Terminal to 135th St, the running from Bay Ridge to 59th St in Brooklyn... If you timed the transfers right it could be a good way to cut down on costs, though it would be a pain for riders. Also, the most recent post from Second Av Sagas talked about the budget shortfall, and basically concluded with saying that cuts to service, like we saw after the 2008 Recession, really only saved around $20 million, and that organizational fixes like having one conductor per train on LIRR could save much more than service cuts. Either way it seems like the MTA needs a bailout from the federal government because no amount of reasonable service cuts are going to close the gap in the budget.
  8. It might be better to have 57th St as a separate line connecting NJ, Manhatthan, and Queens, rather than having Bergenline/JFK be split up into North and South sections feeding into 57th St. I'd imagine having a continuous line would be in high demand.
  9. You'd also probably have most PATH riders upset because now the train doesn't go where most of the jobs are
  10. What kind of service are you thinking of? The via 63rd, then South to the 11th St cut, connecting to Queens Plaza and then using the Queens Blvd local tracks?
  11. Is the benefit of greater coverage for two stations worth the decreased connections of those stations for the entire line though? I also don't personally like the idea of planning for an interlined subway, though I acknowledge this is personal preference. And even so, with an interlined SAS, while riders looking to go to and from Queens might be less affected, riders wanting to go West in Manhattan or go to Astoria would still find transfers more difficult or non-existent. The loss of coverage, in my mind, represents benefits to the whole line that are not reliant on interlining which would reduce frequencies, and even riders who are most affected still find closer subway access since it is on 3rd Av rather than Lex.
  12. I get where you're coming from, but if you include a turn onto 2nd Av South of 42nd St you mitigate a lot of that. The stations on 3rd Av at 42nd and 53rd would be as close to 1st Av as the existing stations are to York Av, so it's not as though there is no benefit since the subway is still closer for riders living on the East side. I guess I assume the increased ease of transferring throughout the rest of the system would lead to more riders than a Subway that is closer to where people live but makes it harder to transfer. If transfers are very inconvenient or don't exist, as would be the case throughout midtown for the SAS, a lot of riders would likely choose to walk to the anyway.
  13. I agree that building the tunnel to Queens as you've described it is a higher priority than building more express service in the UES. I also don't think it's a good idea to have the connect to the existing SAS, like you've said, because it necessarily limits capacity on both the and the . South of 42nd St, as others have mentioned, turning the from 3rd to 2nd would be a good way to provide both transfers in Midtown and better subway coverage for the LES where Manhattan bulges. I don't think these things are mutually exclusive, though. Phase "2.5" where you extend the SAS across 125th St probably makes sense to do before creating a new service down the East Side of Manhattan. You could also have it branch with one covering 125th St and the other covering 3rd Av in the Bronx. Having service South of 63rd St, though, in the form of the is a way of expanding subway access to Queens and a way of boosting the frequency of the SAS, since you could have a service take over 125th St or 3rd Av in the Bronx. Instead of abandoning the or leaving it as a shuttle, you could also try and connect the (P) to the Nassau Line either at Bowery or at Chambers St via Park Row. A new tunnel could then be constructed from the Nassau Line to the Fulton Line. I'd also suggest connecting the to Utica Av rather than continuing it down the Brighton Line and continuing it as the express to Jamaica. I really like the idea of connecting the Northern Boulevard Line to LGA, I've not thought about that before and it's a cool idea.
  14. This pretty much sums up how I feel about what to do with expanding the 2nd Av Line. I'd include a stop at 34th St though. Also, for the // whatever you want to call it, there are two ways I'd do it. If you are deciding to leave the Nassau Line as is, continuing to Jamaica, I'd build the line to Chatham Sq, then down St James Pl/Water St with a stop at the Seaport, after which the would go to Brooklyn connecting to Orange or Pineapple Street, then turn down Adams St with a stop at Willoughby/Fulton St. This would connect the 2nd Av Line with all the trains the current planned routing for Phase 4 will miss, connecting the train to both the Borough Hall and Jay St-Metrotech stations. It would then connect to the Fulton Line, making a stop at Hoyt St. If you decide to break up the Nassau line and connect the 6th Av Express to it, then I'd do it how you routed it or have it turn before Grand St onto the Bowery station. The way I look at 2nd Av is mirroring the Central Park Av Line. The and trains are analogous to the and trains, while the and trains are analogous to the and trains. For this reason, I don't think there needs to be 4 tracks going all along 2nd/3rd Avs. I feel the should be left alone as built, being the local on 2nd Av and the express on Broadway. Of the trains that run on 2nd/3rd Avs South of 63rd St. You could mess with the configurations, but I think one should be the express train in the UES and the express train South of 63rd, and the other should be the local South of 63rd with the connection to Queens. It's easier to just run the service down 3rd Av in the UES, and if you are building that as an express train I'd say it matters a little less that it is farther away from 2nd Av. I agree it doesn't really expand the footprint of the subway system, but the is already doing that.
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.