CBTC to be fully implemented on the (L) in 2012. What do you expect?

[Wallyhorse]

Something has to be done, but it must be something less costly and detrimental to the majority ridership. Keep in mind that the Williamsburg Bridge handles 2 lines (technically 3 during rush hour, but the and are the same anyway). No matter what terminal or line you build to make a home for the other end of a route, you will always be limited by capacity. Besides, 2 Avenue service down to Houston Street is far into the future; for the near future, CBTC does its job and relieves the (L)'s overcrowding problem without rebuilding or screwing with other lines.

 

And let's say by some miracle the 2 Avenue line is connected and working, you still forget that many folks getting on the train between Rockaway Parkway and Atlantic Avenue will have to make one or two transfers to get to their destination instead of 1 (or even 0). The in its current form passes through stations with very high ridership in Manhattan and connects to every major trunk line. What does a over the Williamsburg Bridge running up 2 Avenue connect to?

 

A 70(K) over the Willy B via the SAS would connect to the following:

 

The at both Essex Street and Houston Street stations, giving riders the option of transferring to the one stop later than at present.

 

The at 14th Street.

 

The (4)/(5)/(6)/(7)/(S) at 42nd Street (along with the ability to actually walk from 2nd Avenue to Madison Avenue without having to walk outside assuming that transfer is included).

 

The (E)/(M)/(6) at 55th Street.

 

The (4)/(5)/(6) at 125th Street.

 

If Phase 2 was later supplemented with the SAS going across 125th Street to 12th Avenue, there could be additional transfers on 125th to the (2)/(3) at Lenox Avenue, the (A)/(;)/©/(D) at St. Nicholas Avenue and the at Broadway.

 

Those riders on the 70(K) who would be looking for the to Manhattan would have the option of transferring at Atlantic Avenue, Broadway Junction OR at 2nd Avenue-14th Street (3rd Avenue station, there is supposed to be a transfer to that as part of Phase 3 of the SAS).

[Guest lance25]

We're really reaching, aren't we?

[CenSin]

A K over the Willy B via the SAS would connect to the following:

I thought you'd say that…

 

• The F at both Essex Street and Houston Street stations, giving riders the option of transferring to the F one stop later than at present.

  The L has access to the at Myrtle and Wyckoff Avenues and both the and at 6 Avenue and 14 Street. ***

• The L at 14th Street.

  They can already get the at Atlantic Avenue and Broadway Junction…

• The 4/5/6/7/S at 42nd Street (along with the ability to actually walk from 2nd Avenue to Madison Avenue without having to walk outside assuming that transfer is included).

  If the line is built that far down, this connection will likely be built. Though, I doubt people would enjoy a long walk to transfer to another train 2 avenues away.

• The E/M/6 at 55th Street.

  The and are at 53 Street. The is at Lexington Avenue and 51 Street. *, ***

• The 4/5/6 at 125th Street.

  Would anyone from Canarsie actually travel all the way to 125 Street via a 2 Avenue local in Manhattan just to get Lexington Avenue service?

• If Phase 2 was later supplemented with the SAS going across 125th Street to 12th Avenue, there could be additional transfers on 125th to the 2/3 at Lenox Avenue, the A/B/C/D at St. Nicholas Avenue and the 1 at Broadway.

  Similar to my point above, who would travel that far up Manhattan just to access the routes across? **, ***

• Those riders on the K who would be looking for the L to Manhattan would have the option of transferring at Atlantic Avenue, Broadway Junction OR at 2nd Avenue-14th Street (3rd Avenue L station, there is supposed to be a transfer to that as part of Phase 3 of the SAS).

  They can already get the at Atlantic Avenue or Broadway Junction under your proposal. *

 

 

* All of the transfers you mentioned are only under consideration. Considering that they cut so many corners out of the current 2 Avenue line construction, I find it hard to believe they will build every connection as planned in the original.

 

** Furthermore, there are no plans (not even the intention) to extend the line across 125 Street. Your ideas are getting very far-fetched.

 

*** If you look at the map below, you'll also notice that all of your proposed transfers are very far away from the most popular destinations or drop people off around those destinations. The transfers, if all built would also be long since most lines don't have their stations on 2 Avenue itself. The L's transfer points on the other hand are all directly underneath the lines they connect with (except 7 Avenue) and go right through the heart of the trunk lines.

Your proposed transfer points are circled in black. The red-tinted area is where most riders are headed.

If you named any one station in Manhattan (other than 155 Street), I can show you how the will get you there with one transfer or less (except 155 Street on the ( and ) and with the least amount of travel time. That's not so true with your K.

 

You have still completely ignored the fact that you either have to get rid of two services over the Williamsburg Bridge to squeeze in a K.

 

Getting back to reality, CBTC is already here!

[Mysterious2train]

Fixing up Atlantic Av to serve as a short-turn terminal for Eastbound trains actually isn't a bad idea.

[TwoTimer]

I remember working the when the had some major problem and it was terminating on the n/b plat of the line and relaying at Chauncey middle at first. came in the middle at Bway Jnct. I know a few of you would have ran out there with cameras for that lol.

[Kamen Rider]

Please, watch the Nazi Banksters Crimes Ripple Effect at http://jforjustice.co.uk/banksters

[CenSin]

A 70(K) over the Willy B via the SAS

In addition, more likely than over the Williamsburg Bridge (which has no obvious connection plan), the 2 Avenue line would have extended to the southwestern portions of Brooklyn via Nassau Street and the Montague Street Tunnel instead, though the MTA did a study on the possibility and concluded that the connection would be unfeasible due to the kind of soil/rock there. 2 Avenue will most likely pass right through without any sort of physical connection if the MTA manages to build that far.

 

Your 70(K) is not impossible, but so far it goes against everything the facts tell us.

[Roadcruiser1]

In addition, more likely than over the Williamsburg Bridge (which has no obvious connection plan), the 2 Avenue line would have extended to the southwestern portions of Brooklyn via Nassau Street and the Montague Street Tunnel instead, though the MTA did a study on the possibility and concluded that the connection would be unfeasible due to the kind of soil/rock there. 2 Avenue will most likely pass right through without any sort of physical connection if the MTA manages to build that far.

 

Your 70(K) is not impossible, but so far it goes against everything the facts tell us.

 

Out of curiosity is a connection to the Rutgers Street Tunnel possible for the Second Avenue Subway if it goes that far?

[CenSin]

Out of curiosity is a connection to the Rutgers Street Tunnel possible for the Second Avenue Subway if it goes that far?

We won't know unless they do a feasibility study. Considering the volume of passengers the carries, I doubt they'd want to do any sort of construction on the Rutgers Street tube (but they somehow managed it on the Queens Boulevard line which carried the , , , and ). The MTA probably looked at connecting 2 Avenue to the Nassau Street line because there's extra tunnel capacity and they can do work out of the way of regular traffic.

 

In my honest opinion, the MTA should still consider using the upper level of the 2 Avenue–Lower East Side station, continue the tracks closer to the surface of 2 Avenue and Chrystie Street, and bring the tracks into the Grand Street station's island platforms. That option is already on the table. Currently, the MTA says it does not want to disrupt the park sitting above and adjacent to the tunnel, hence its (unfinalized) plans to dig a new lower level for 2 Avenue at both stations and eschew track connections to the Manhattan Bridge.

[Roadcruiser1]

We won't know unless they do a feasibility study. Considering the volume of passengers the carries, I doubt they'd want to do any sort of construction on the Rutgers Street tube (but they somehow managed it on the Queens Boulevard line which carried the , , , and ). The MTA probably looked at connecting 2 Avenue to the Nassau Street line because there's extra tunnel capacity and they can do work out of the way of regular traffic.

 

In my honest opinion, the MTA should still consider using the upper level of the 2 Avenue–Lower East Side station, continue the tracks closer to the surface of 2 Avenue and Chrystie Street, and bring the tracks into the Grand Street station's island platforms. That option is already on the table. Currently, the MTA says it does not want to disrupt the park sitting above and adjacent to the tunnel, hence its (unfinalized) plans to dig a new lower level for 2 Avenue at both stations and eschew track connections to the Manhattan Bridge.

 

I think they should. Since the Second Avenue Subway would get really close to the 2nd Avenue station you can have a spur branch come off of there and join the to Brooklyn. It would cut cost less than drill a new tunnel underneath the East River to Brooklyn. Just a connection. It doesn't have to be used immediately of course.

[Wallyhorse]

We won't know unless they do a feasibility study. Considering the volume of passengers the carries, I doubt they'd want to do any sort of construction on the Rutgers Street tube (but they somehow managed it on the Queens Boulevard line which carried the , , , and ). The MTA probably looked at connecting 2 Avenue to the Nassau Street line because there's extra tunnel capacity and they can do work out of the way of regular traffic.

 

In my honest opinion, the MTA should still consider using the upper level of the 2 Avenue–Lower East Side station, continue the tracks closer to the surface of 2 Avenue and Chrystie Street, and bring the tracks into the Grand Street station's island platforms. That option is already on the table. Currently, the MTA says it does not want to disrupt the park sitting above and adjacent to the tunnel, hence its (unfinalized) plans to dig a new lower level for 2 Avenue at both stations and eschew track connections to the Manhattan Bridge.

 

It would make much more sense if at all possible to use the existing Houston Street station that was built for the SAS if it ever got that far. The key to doing so would be the educate people that the work needed in this case would allow for much easier transfers between the SAS and 6th Avenue lines at Grand Street, and also would allow potentially for connections to both the Broadway-Brooklyn and Nassau Street lines from the SAS with connections to both lines.

 

As for 125th Street, I forgot about the fault line there. If anything, I would seriously be looking to if that's the case build that part of the SAS as an elevated line, perhaps coming out of a portal on Second Avenue before 125 (since much of that part will be closer to the surface anyway to connect to parts built in the '70s) and have it go to an elevated platform with a stop at 125th/Lex-Park (that would be similar to my ideas for a rebuilt 3rd Avenue El), with transfers from that platform to both the (4)/(5)/(6) and Metro North. If the line continued west from there, I would then go across 125 as previously noted.

[CenSin]

As for 125th Street, I forgot about the fault line there. If anything, I would seriously be looking to if that's the case build that part of the SAS as an elevated line, perhaps coming out of a portal on Second Avenue before 125 (since much of that part will be closer to the surface anyway to connect to parts built in the '70s) and have it go to an elevated platform with a stop at 125th/Lex-Park (that would be similar to my ideas for a rebuilt 3rd Avenue El), with transfers from that platform to both the (4)/(5)/(6) and Metro North. If the line continued west from there, I would then go across 125 as previously noted.

They still build elevated lines in Manhattan? Where would you find the space to built a ramp?

[Wallyhorse]

They still build elevated lines in Manhattan? Where would you find the space to built a ramp?

 

Probably just north of 113th or 114th Street. 116th Street would be an elevated station (exits probably at 116th and 118th Street) before turning at 125th with a terminal at Lexington-Park Avenues. This would eliminate concerns about the fault and allow the line to eventually go all the way west to Broadway as an elevated line.

[CenSin]

Probably just north of 113th or 114th Street. 116th Street would be an elevated station (exits probably at 116th and 118th Street) before turning at 125th with a terminal at Lexington-Park Avenues. This would eliminate concerns about the fault and allow the line to eventually go all the way west to Broadway as an elevated line.

Take a good look at the satellite images of the area and find me several blocks of continuous vacant space from which trains can ramp up to form an elevated line. Never mind the fact that once found, the plan would be shot down anyway by the locals.

[Guest lance25]

Since we're really delving into fantasy territory, I'm just gonna lock this down. Second Avenue will not be elevated anywhere. There will not be any crosstown line at 125th Street any time soon; same thing concerning a Nassau Street-Second Avenue connection, regardless of how beneficial it may seem.