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.
Sign in to follow this  
LRG

Culver Viaduct rehab

Recommended Posts

It really looks like the Culver Viaduct reconstruction is finally underway, and it's getting very extensive. The gates are up (some are in the process of being installed upright). The northbound express track from Fourth Avenue to Carroll Street has been pulled up and the southbound express track in this section no longer has a third rail. The ballast is being loosened up, and the ties have been taken out. So I think express service will live again, I hope. But whether or not Bergen Street (LL) is getting overhauled I don't know. It's all too soon to tell but let's hope for the best. The good news is that the (G) goes to Church now, like a proper line should (Smith-Ninth Street was a really inadequate terminal, it wasn't even a real terminal, IMO).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well you do know the (G) use to end at Church avenue during the early 70s when the (F) ran as the Culver exp?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
It really looks like the Culver Viaduct reconstruction is finally underway, and it's getting very extensive. The gates are up (some are in the process of being installed upright). The northbound express track from Fourth Avenue to Carroll Street has been pulled up and the southbound express track in this section no longer has a third rail. The ballast is being loosened up, and the ties have been taken out. So I think express service will live again, I hope. But whether or not Bergen Street (LL) is getting overhauled I don't know. It's all too soon to tell but let's hope for the best. The good news is that the (G) goes to Church now, like a proper line should (Smith-Ninth Street was a really inadequate terminal, it wasn't even a real terminal, IMO).

 

I noticed posters on the 21st St-Van Alst (G) station todays saying the Church Avenue extension is for the next four years, and implied it is only a stopgap measure. What happens when the Culver Viaduct project is completed? Does the (G) get extended to Coney Island, stay at Church Avenue, or pulled back to Smith-Ninth Sts?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Once the Culver Viaduct rehab is done,MTA should not turn the G back to Smith-9 Street,it will be impractical for them to do so.i say keep the G at it's new home permanently,even when the project is over.reinstating Rush Hour service both ways from Bergen Street station to Church Avenue station and peak direction from 18th Avenue station to Kings Highway station.restore the old service pattern as a trial run and see if F and G line riders welcome it back.ofcourse we have to wait and be patient.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What is with everyone's insistence that the MTA bring back the lower Bergen St station back into service? In that case, the MTA should bring back the City Hall lower level back in service and also the 9th Ave lower level. :tdown:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Ninth Avenue LL is never coming back into service. It's a good place to terminate trains in case trains can't go to Coney Island but I can't see that ever happening. Might as well turn it into a yard like City Hall LL is used for.

 

CIty Hall in the IRT is never coming back into service either. It poses a security threat especially since 9/11 and ridership was never heavy enough for it since it opened becase the Brooklyn Bridge Station and City Hall on the BMT is too close.

 

As for Bergen Street only time will tell. I'm not saying "No", I'm saying that it's too soon to tell right at this moment. But if express service is restored then Park Slope residents will protest that they have to go to Seventh Avenue for an express train to get to Manhattan. And although work would have to be put into Bergen Street, like installing new stairs, new tilework and possibly elevators, it can be very well possible.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
What is with everyone's insistence that the MTA bring back the lower Bergen St station back into service? In that case, the MTA should bring back the City Hall lower level back in service and also the 9th Ave lower level. :tdown:

 

Foaming over unused parts of the system and wanting them opened back up because they want to see them legally, is my guess.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

CIty Hall in the IRT is never coming back into service either. It poses a security threat especially since 9/11 and ridership was never heavy enough for it since it opened becase the Brooklyn Bridge Station and City Hall on the BMT is too close.

I said City Hall lower level, not City Hall IRT. B)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I said City Hall lower level, not City Hall IRT. B)

 

Oh, sorry. Still, if it wasn't needed in the 1910s when it wasn't built, it certainly isn't needed now. It would be a good place to relay trains in case Lower Mnahattan was impassible, but why relay trains there when you can send them over the Manhattan Bridge?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Oh, sorry. Still, if it wasn't needed in the 1910s when it wasn't built, it certainly isn't needed now. It would be a good place to relay trains in case Lower Mnahattan was impassible, but why relay trains there when you can send them over the Manhattan Bridge?

I'm not advocating for the return of service to these stations, I'm using it as an example as to why I think it's crazy that people keep wanting the Bergen Lower level to be brought back into revenue service.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I'm not advocating for the return of service to these stations, I'm using it as an example as to why I think it's crazy that people keep wanting the Bergen Lower level to be brought back into revenue service.

 

Why, are you against it or something?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Foaming over unused parts of the system and wanting them opened back up because they want to see them legally, is my guess.

Seems very true. Might as well open up both loops of South Ferry so they could drip even more.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Off topic for a bit,you really can't compare Bergen Street-lower level platforms as to 9th Avenue-lower level,City Hall-BMT-lower level or 42 Street-Port Authority lower level platforms,those platforms are useless and do not need to be repaired or opened.Bergen Street lower level has potential and should be needed for riders advocating express service on that segment.ofcourse if the MTA didn't want to spend extra cash to fix up the lower level,the possible express station would be from Jay Street Station.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Off topic for a bit,you really can't compare Bergen Street-lower level platforms as to 9th Avenue-lower level,City Hall-BMT-lower level or 42 Street-Port Authority lower level platforms,those platforms are useless and do not need to be repaired or opened.Bergen Street lower level has potential and should be needed for riders advocating express service on that segment.ofcourse if the MTA didn't want to spend extra cash to fix up the lower level,the possible express station would be from Jay Street Station.

Well, how much potential will it get?

How many people would use the lower level?

Is it a necessary investment?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
What is with everyone's insistence that the MTA bring back the lower Bergen St station back into service? In that case, the MTA should bring back the City Hall lower level back in service and also the 9th Ave lower level. :tdown:

 

Been there, done that. Keep'em closed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I noticed posters on the 21st St-Van Alst (G) station todays saying the Church Avenue extension is for the next four years, and implied it is only a stopgap measure. What happens when the Culver Viaduct project is completed? Does the (G) get extended to Coney Island, stay at Church Avenue, or pulled back to Smith-Ninth Sts?

 

The (MTA) said that if there is high rider ship thr (G) will remain at church av. If not the (G) would be redirected back to Smith-9 Sts.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
We Shall see what happen the to (G) in 4 years. It's just to early to tell what the (MTA) has in mind for the (G).

 

Just asking to see if anyone knew about the (MTA)'s plans for the (G). Will just have to wait and see.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And in reference to Bergen Street LL, it's too soon to tell. We'll just have to wait a few years to see if the MTA will restore it. Of course, work will have to be done on the lower level but if people are going to fight for express service, then they'll be fighting for the LL. But let's wait and see.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

***DISCLAIMER***: I am not advocating this because I would like to see the LL open again. I honestly couldn't a crap if I ever saw the station in my lifetime.

 

If (and I think it should, but that is a different argument) (F) express service comes back, it would make sense to reopen the lower level. Bergen street is a highly used stop, and to have express service (if it were to comeback) the LL is necessary for service otherwise trains cannot skip Carroll street. Plus, it would add extra capacity if another line were extended as the Culver local.

 

***DISCLAIMER***: I am not advocating this because I would like to see the LL open again. I honestly couldn't a crap if I ever saw the station in my lifetime.

 

So if anyone gives any crap to me about how we can't just open up abandoned stations because we want to see them, you didn't read the disclaimer, above and below my post. Also, don't argue about the (F) express, and whether you think it's useful or not. All I'm saying is that if it were to happen.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Before we jump the gun and talk about (F) express service and all this talk about the (V) in Brooklyn, how about let's just wait till this construction work is finished or at least close to finished? We are only in the very early phases of construction. I would like to see service improvements myself, but many things could happen after the construction work is over.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Regarding the (F) express, (V) to Brooklyn, and Bergen Lower "discussions" starting up again...

 

nmxhdf.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I seriously hope I not annoying for asking but why does the Culver Viaduct rehab decide whether the (F) having express service or not?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

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