Excavation of West Tunnel for Second Avenue Subway Almost Complete

[T to Dyre Avenue]

Wirelessly posted via (BlackBerry8520/5.0.0.900 Profile/MIDP-2.1 Configuration/CLDC-1.1 VendorID/100)

As for the Culver part, if they do extended it there, you will now have 3 trains there (you forgot about the ). If its the & only, then where will the go? That train has been a critical part of the Culver (The viaduct is still technicall part of the Culver line) for decades, espically for riders comming from the that need Park Slope (or whatever that area around 9 St is) the only has crossovers at Church Av, 4 Av and then Bedfird-Nostrand so it would be damn near impossible to turn trains around except for those areas

I didn't forget about the . service would run on the Culver Local tracks to Church Avenue as it does now. It would have to. An express would be useless and there would be widespread complaining if the were the only local service between Church and Bergen. It would also be impossible to run a express, because the Crosstown line connects only to the Culver Local tracks. My point was that in order to have a Culver Express, there must also be a Culver Local that goes to Manhattan. The had been proposed to fill that role, allowing the to go express (or vice versa; local and express). But now that the has taken the (V)'s place, that's not possible without reducing the frequency of the current and services.

 

However if the SAS is built as far south as Houston Street (Phase 3), you can have Culver Local and Express services that serve Manhattan. And it wouldn't require reducing current 6th Avenue Local service.

[CenSin]

I didn't forget about the . service would run on the Culver Local tracks to Church Avenue as it does now. It would have to. An express would be useless and there would be widespread complaining if the were the only local service between Church and Bergen. It would also be impossible to run because the Crosstown line connects only to the Culver Local tracks. My point was that in order to have a Culver Express, there must also be a Culver Local that goes to Manhattan. The had been proposed to fill that role, allowing the to go express. But now that the has taken the (V)'s place, that's not possible without reducing the frequency of the current and services.

 

However if the SAS is built as far south as Houston Street (Phase 3), you can have Culver Local and Express services that serve Manhattan. And it wouldn't require reducing current 6th Avenue Local service.

It might also pave the way to extending east side service to the tip of Brooklyn, alleviating the need to transfer to the , , and trains. In fact, for the Culver line there is no such transfer until Broadway–Lafayette Street where the transfer is to the local train and going downtown. There will be an uptown transfer well before the time the 2 Avenue subway is done, but that's besides the point.

[T to Dyre Avenue]

I remember that fantasy map. Thing is it doesn't deal completely with the idea of a gaping hole in central Bronx service since that 3Av el was torn down. I always suggested having some line piggyback over the Metro North tracks up to Fordham (with tunneling only from the 161st area south, not that far when you consider the distance that TBM is going in Manhattan), minimizing eminent domain abuse and helping to revamp what is now a downtrodden, drug infested residential/industrial spaces along Park Av. Thing is, this will never happen because unlike 2Av, this area in the Bronx is not desirable, and never will be. After the temporary turmoil along 2Av, the area along 2av will be probably among the most energetic spaces in the city.

 

But about a mile north of there are the Fordham University and Arthur Avenue areas. I think there's some real potential there. Energetic as Second Avenue? No. But certainly more desirable and energetic than the areas to the south. I just wonder how they would be able to build a subway right-of-way over the Metro-North open cut along Park Avenue. It's a tight fit in some areas.