Porter

As of yesterday afternoon, the WTC Cortlandt station is now 100% complete, with the northwest entrance now fully reopened. With this, WTC transit connectivity is 100% complete.

https://newyorkyimby.com/2023/09/perelman-performing-arts-center-opens-to-the-public-at-the-world-trade-center-in-financial-district.html

@T to Dyre Avenue

I'm not sure exactly what you mean. What would the route be in that scenario where the  serves Forest Hills instead?

20 minutes ago, P3F said:

There isn't enough capacity on the 6th Avenue local tracks. (And the track layout does not allow the  to run via 6th Avenue express).

I doubt that Forest Hills and Middle Village would want their services cut in half, I suppose.

Once Phase 3 of the SAS is complete, how about running a between Forest Hills and Houston Street (ultimately Hanover Square)? There's a way for it to serve 36th Street with the before sharing Queensbridge and Roosevelt Island with the , ultimately taking a southerly turn short of Lexington–63rd and heading down Second Avenue with the . I'm not sure whether that would force the up 96th or otherwise a restoration of the , but perhaps serving Bay Ridge with the this time instead of Bay Parkway.

On 9/19/2019 at 8:50 AM, vioreen said:

Maybe they should restore the V train but to 96 street second avenue and the M train can go back to its old previous service back to bay parkway

That got me thinking... What if the were to run from Middle Village–Metropolitan Avenue to 96th Street at all times, and then the original service could be restored as it was before being discontinued? That would be a fairly equitable division of routes with minimal confusion.

16 minutes ago, Union Tpke said:

You would have to remove columns and rebuild part of the structure for crossovers to turn trains. You would also need crew facilities, among other additional expenses.

Absolutely, that should all be done too. It still delays the expense of 125th Street, since you're just pushing the current terminus north, along with all the modifications that such a transposition requires.

If we want anything more finished within our lifetimes, I propose creating a Phase 1.5. The space leading up to 106th Street and from 110th to 120th has already been excavated decades ago. If you clear out four blocks of dirt, the line will reach up to 120th Street continuously, plenty of space for tail tracks. Why not get the 106th Street and 116th Street stations open before digging that expensive curve to 125th? Let's get East Harlem some better service sooner than later, yeah?

In preparation for a future SAS "Phase 5" to Brooklyn, might it serve as a good intermediate stage to construct a short connection between the Montague Tunnel and the unused Court Street station (currently the Transit Museum) leading to the underused Fulton Line via Hoyt–Schermerhorn? This would branch off before normal service reaches the extant northern Court Street station. This would alleviate turnaround issues and make better use of the Montague Tunnel and Fulton Line, all the while getting the southern Court Street station up and running in anticipation of future service.

On 4/28/2019 at 10:41 AM, Around the Horn said:

I do think long term that a separate 4th Avenue-Nassau service is necessary however I would leave the  designation alone. A rush hour extension of the  is a good intermediate  measure that can lead to a full time service later once capital improvements are completed. That separate service should just be K or R or something along those lines rather than giving it a letter already in use.

Precisely my thoughts. Changes to service needn't all happen at once, so rush-hour service to Bay Ridge would indeed be a good provisional stage (serving as a trial period) before permanent service is tentatively implemented.

With some clever modifications, the abandoned sections of Chambers, Canal, and Bowery could be used for a new service to Bay Ridge. I don't think Essex Street has the space though, does it?

Well, if it's not too long a service route for the and together, then I say go for it!

1 hour ago, Around the Horn said:

That would require a complete rewrite of the schedule

A capital idea, indeed!

11 hours ago, Lance said:

Just a reminder folks: any realistic scenario that fixes 4th Avenue service and the will likely come with little to no new construction.

2 hours ago, T to Dyre Avenue said:

Well, after two months, I haven’t seen much action on this idea. Hell, I even joined the Bay Ridge Transit group on Facebook thinking there’d be something new about it. But no, not much about it there either. Still plenty of complaints about how bad subway service in Bay Ridge is, though.

That’s one reason I suggested the 24/7 Nassau K service (well, 24/7 to Chambers; weekdays extended to Essex middle with the  moved to the outer tracks) and the weekday  to replace the  in Brooklyn.

Well, a temporary stepping-stone solution is now clear to me: the should run through 4th Avenue to and from Bay Ridge in peak directions during peak hours. Since these peak directions are opposite those of the from Jamaica, and since the two stretches only overlap in Manhattan, they should not be in any conflict. The is underused, the Montague tunnel is underused, the 4th Avenue corridor is underused, and Bay Ridge needs more service. The would keep all of its current functions, but also assume the duties of the long retired service with a sprinkle of , except the needs no new bullets to be added or restored.

This piggybacks on some of T to Dyre Avenue's ideas, but since Bay Ridge is in need of better service, wouldn't the easiest stepping stone be to run the to Bay Ridge in peak directions during peak hours? The peak direction of the northern is opposite that of the peak direction of the here proposed southern , so they shouldn't ever come into conflict.

1) The is underused and only plays a role northeast of Essex.

2) The Montague tunnel is underused.

3) The 4th Avenue corridor is underused.

4) Bay Ridge needs more service.

19 hours ago, T to Dyre Avenue said:

I’m going to suggest the Nassau St K service as the primary 4th Ave local with the  as the secondary with the  cut back to Whitehall, like I suggested way back in this thread

 

This is my first time seeing it, but I like that idea, actually. The would still have to be capped off at Chambers Street for now, which is a bit of a choke, but perhaps future renovations could bring it along through Canal and ultimately Bowery, where it would terminate at the unused/underused track(s). The Manhattan section of the line would thus be until the at Essex, a nice division of bandwidth. Otherwise, I think it would be neat to connect the to Nassau somehow, or even terminate it at 2nd Avenue alongside the (where the used to terminate) if money gets tight.

According to Joe Wong:

Quote

The Brown [] was also known as the “BANKERS SPECIAL” which only ran from Bay Ridge 95 Street to Chambers Street during the morning rush hours and from Chambers Street during the evening rush hours.

When the (aka #2 or ) operated from Astoria-Ditmars Blvd to Bay Ridge-95 Street from 1949 to 1987, the service was relatively reliable and you can set your watch by it. However, when it swapped its Queens terminal with the in 1987, service on this line deteriorated and plummeted from reliable to spotty and unreliable at best with its one hour and 36 minutes running time end to end, similar to the old which operated from the now demolished 168 Street-Jamaica to Coney Island via Brighton Local from 1967 to 1973.

Maybe the and termini should revert and switch back—then the could run as well as intended. Then again, that might obsolesce the .

On 3/18/2019 at 4:54 PM, T to Dyre Avenue said:

My next best option would be to have a brown  service to/from Essex replace the  as the main 4th Ave local train with the  functioning as the secondary 4th Ave local and the  getting cut back to Whitehall.

I've always liked the idea of a line.

Perhaps this has been brought up before, but why not revive the  as it had existed in 1987? This would split the from Bay Ridge and allow peak hour riders to make transfers at Fulton or Chambers without being bogged down by issues in Queens. The infrastructure and bullets already exist.

Even if the SAS Bronx extension were to become elevated, it could only surface at some point after the 3rd Avenue—149th Street Station.

On 3/10/2019 at 4:44 PM, bobtehpanda said:

Is it really needed? The and overlap their entire length, never being more than a block apart, and if you really want that transfer it's available at Park Pl or Times Square.

If you're already on the in Lower Manhattan and want to reach down into Brooklyn along the IND corridors, a transfer at Canal Street would make sense. It wouldn't be a super popular transfer, but the stations are right next to each other and share a name, with plenty of space for a pedestrian tunnel. If there's an eastern Canal Street complex with the , why not have a western one with the ? Two stations with the name Canal Street beats three, I'd say.

As far as Canal Street goes, I'd really like a free in-system transfer between the and . That would be a smaller and less disruptive project, at least. I do like the proposal, though.

This place opened less than a month ago, no excuse...

to Chambers? Seriously? One of the WTC Cortlandt exits is perpendicularly juxtaposed to their only entrance, and Park Place is significantly closer than Chambers. And come on, the has been back for years. Who didn't do their research?

EDIT: Looks like they just copied Westfield WTC's 'Getting Here' section. Shame on both of them!

The very thought of newly constructed elevated tracks is hilarious, just as no one would think of building elevated highways in major cities anymore.

Take the SAS under the water!

Ladies and gentlemen, we finally have a full house at the Fulton Center. It almost gives Times Square a run for its money if you consider that a third of these lines are doubled up!

(thanks Tomasz Bykowski)

By the way, if anyone is in the area, could you please tell me whether the southwest portion of 3WTC (where the lobby connects to the mall concourse) has opened yet? It's damned cold!

Quote

If the MTA resumes work, a section built from 110th to 120th Streets could finally be used. But parts of the original plan would have to change.

The thinking back in the 1970s was to use a section as maintenance tracks for trains that needed repair work. Now it would be used as an island platform if and when the 116th Street station gets built.

https://www.ny1.com/nyc/all-boroughs/transit/2018/12/08/second-avenue-subway-tunnel-never-used-a-rare-look-manhattan-nyc

What happened to the platform width issue?

On 12/13/2018 at 9:09 AM, N6 Limited said:

I notice that the station is on a "bridge" over the Path Train Station, how did they pull that off?

Expensively. Not even a single trace of the original station remains, yet the train runs through the exact same space that it always had for over a century. The insistence on finishing the memorial plaza before everything else delayed the station considerably. Before 9/11, the station was still 'suspended' over the PATH station in a way, but far more opaquely; the famous giant bank of escalators descending into the PATH station actually used to duck directly under the station, and I doubt that more than a few people even knew or noticed (I always thought it would've been neat had they installed windows in the station overlooking the escalators). The new WTC mall is a lot more open with its layout than was the old one, so it's easier to see how things are really arranged just by looking around.

The new WTC Cortlandt station is both an elevated station and an underground station at the same time.

Someone on a weekday afternoon smoked crack on the Fulton platform right in front of an employee, who ignored it. What the hell is going on?

Would there be any serious consequences if both Rector Street stations were permanently closed? Are they really needed? 18th and 28th on the seem useless too.