MTR Admiralty Posted January 20, 2012 Share #1 Posted January 20, 2012 The blog NY by dZine featured a post for a Crosstown L train: The blogger intended to extend the L train to 23rd Street and 11th Avenue, via new tunnelling, and proposed to link that to the new station by Hudson Yards, in an original plan. Now he wants to send the L, via 34th Street, 5th Avenue and 41st Street to United Nations. What are your thoughts? Original post Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roadcruiser1 Posted January 20, 2012 Share #2 Posted January 20, 2012 The blog NY by dZine featured a post for a Crosstown L train:The blogger intended to extend the L train to 23rd Street and 11th Avenue, via new tunnelling, and proposed to link that to the new station by Hudson Yards, in an original plan. Now he wants to send the L, via 34th Street, 5th Avenue and 41st Street to United Nations. What are your thoughts? Original post Useless since the Second Avenue Subway would have a stop a block away from the UN Building. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TwoTimer Posted January 20, 2012 Share #3 Posted January 20, 2012 (starts laughing) He would have a better argument chopping the into two segments... a shuttle type segment from 3Av-8Av, and turning the existing service uptown after 1Av up 2nd Av to join the (a corridor not unlike the one at Court Sq connects the two). I can see that before I see the SAS Phase 4. (finishes laughing) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joe From Greenpernt Posted January 20, 2012 Share #4 Posted January 20, 2012 Some people have waaaaaaaay too much time on their hands. I'm surprised he didn't route it through Hoboken first. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FamousNYLover Posted January 20, 2012 Share #5 Posted January 20, 2012 That's going to make more longer wait. It almost look like half version of JR Yakohama Line Loop!1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shortline Bus Posted January 20, 2012 Share #6 Posted January 20, 2012 (starts laughing) He would have a better argument chopping the into two segments... a shuttle type segment from 3Av-8Av, and turning the existing service uptown after 1Av up 2nd Av to join the (a corridor not unlike the one at Court Sq connects the two). I can see that before I see the SAS Phase 4. (finishes laughing) This is what 2-timer laugh sounds like right now after reading this blogger radical plan to extend the line. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest lance25 Posted January 20, 2012 Share #7 Posted January 20, 2012 What's wrong with transferring? The only thing on that map I'd support is an extension to 34th & 11th to meet the . Other than that, some people need to get off their lazy asses and walk. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GreatOne2k Posted January 20, 2012 Share #8 Posted January 20, 2012 What's wrong with transferring? The only thing on that map I'd support is an extension to 34th & 11th to meet the . Other than that, some people need to get off their lazy asses and walk. Or use the M15 SBS if they have a bus transfer left to save some walking. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
overclocked Posted January 20, 2012 Share #9 Posted January 20, 2012 Really? There are so many things wrong with this proposal First of all the trunk line is way too curved, which will slow down the traffic on one of the busiest lines in the city. Second, the construction will be of extreme difficulty since it will go through the center of Manhattan and under existing lines. I doubt the city will approve such thoughtless project. Third, who wants to go to UN using subway? Besides service personnel, all the diplomats travel by cars for safety reasons. Last of all, where is the funding for it? Thus everyone can forget about this "extension", at least for now. IMO, Full length SAS > any other rapid transit extension Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
N6 Limited Posted January 20, 2012 Share #10 Posted January 20, 2012 I like the map. I didnt read the blog Really?There are so many things wrong with this proposal First of all the trunk line is way too curved, which will slow down the traffic on one of the busiest lines in the city. Second, the construction will be of extreme difficulty since it will go through the center of Manhattan and under existing lines. I doubt the city will approve such thoughtless project. Third, who wants to go to UN using subway? Besides service personnel, all the diplomats travel by cars for safety reasons. Last of all, where is the funding for it? Thus everyone can forget about this "extension", at least for now. IMO, Full length SAS > any other rapid transit extension Way too curved? LOL have you seen the existing line? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LRG Posted January 20, 2012 Share #11 Posted January 20, 2012 What's wrong with transferring? The only thing on that map I'd support is an extension to 34th & 11th to meet the . Other than that, some people need to get off their lazy asses and walk. This I agree with. I've always thought of an extension to 34th Street with the . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
overclocked Posted January 20, 2012 Share #12 Posted January 20, 2012 I like the map. I didnt read the blog Way too curved? LOL have you seen the existing line? Who wants to trip twice on the same rake? lol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shortline Bus Posted January 20, 2012 Share #13 Posted January 20, 2012 This I agree with. I've always thought of an extension to 34th Street with the . Or even in future extend the at least to Chelesa Piers area. Too bad it 's so expensive. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mysterious2train Posted January 21, 2012 Share #14 Posted January 21, 2012 The to Grand Central, at least that's original. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pjbr40 Posted January 21, 2012 Share #15 Posted January 21, 2012 it sound totally retarded. L loop like in chicago? like nelson said in the simpson "ha ha" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MTR Admiralty Posted January 21, 2012 Author Share #16 Posted January 21, 2012 I mean, I do understand why the person may extend this. But I do have to say that this is too much dream than reality: -Extending the like that is really not cost-effective; I would perhaps simply extend the -Moreover, because of the engineering complexity, it would take forever to be built. Talk about tunneling near some of the tallest skyscrapers in the city - underpinning the ESB, anyone? -There is already a plan for light rail on the 42nd Street corridor, and there are plans to extend the line to Penn Station (which was perhaps the original intention) -The number of passengers headed to East Midtown from Penn Station would be somewhat reduced due to the ESA. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
N6 Limited Posted January 21, 2012 Share #17 Posted January 21, 2012 Connecting Grand Central and Penn Station is a good idea. As well as Chelsea Piers and the 7 train. It will have some issues going under the stack at Herald Square, but if anything it can be cut short to Grand Central. Though if the 2nd Ave subway is actually extended south, a 1st-2nd Ave station would be useful. I bet developers wouldn't have a problem with having service on the west side. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SoSpectacular Posted January 21, 2012 Share #18 Posted January 21, 2012 That's the most farfetched plan I've ever seen... People really need to stop relying on the one-seat rides and worry about places where public transit is most needed Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kamen Rider Posted January 21, 2012 Share #19 Posted January 21, 2012 Please, watch the Nazi Banksters Crimes Ripple Effect at http://jforjustice.co.uk/banksters Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CenSin Posted January 21, 2012 Share #20 Posted January 21, 2012 The blog NY by dZine featured a post for a Crosstown L train:The blogger intended to extend the L train to 23rd Street and 11th Avenue, via new tunnelling, and proposed to link that to the new station by Hudson Yards, in an original plan. Now he wants to send the L, via 34th Street, 5th Avenue and 41st Street to United Nations. What are your thoughts? Original post If the and should meet, it should be at 14 Street. The already covers West 41 to West 26 Streets along 11 Avenue (the tunnels go that far south) and the riders can already access all of the other stations via a transfer to any train. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roadcruiser1 Posted January 21, 2012 Share #21 Posted January 21, 2012 Just to prove it the Second Avenue Subway does have a stop at 42nd Street and Second Avenue only a block away from the UN Building. I heard that there is a East Side Redevelopment Plan there. I guess that is the only thing that might be served by such a station, and there is a two blocks long passageway to Grand Central Terminal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joe From Greenpernt Posted January 21, 2012 Share #22 Posted January 21, 2012 Just to prove it the Second Avenue Subway does have a stop at 42nd Street and Second Avenue only a block away from the UN Building. I heard that there is a East Side Redevelopment Plan there. I guess that is the only thing that might be served by such a station, and there is a two blocks long passageway to Grand Central Terminal. By the time the MTA gets around to continue the Second Ave. Line that far south, and complete it, the U.N. might have new digs elsewhere. Any ideas about a or service extension to Lucerne, Switzerland? At least the orientation of the Brooklyn College/Flatbush Ave. terminal is approximately in the right direction to continue there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wallyhorse Posted January 21, 2012 Share #23 Posted January 21, 2012 (starts laughing) He would have a better argument chopping the into two segments... a shuttle type segment from 3Av-8Av, and turning the existing service uptown after 1Av up 2nd Av to join the (a corridor not unlike the one at Court Sq connects the two). I can see that before I see the SAS Phase 4. (finishes laughing) Having the turn up 2nd Avenue to join the SAS is much better than his idea. That said, I'll stick to my earlier view that if you're going to extend the , do it as a line that would meet up with the at some point, either at the new terminal OR at a new 41st Street-10th Avenue station (that would have a transfer between the and ) that I would have as part of a 10th Avenue extension of the that would terminate at 72nd/Amsterdam-Broadway under the (1)/(2)/(3) (obviously with a transfer to those lines) OR perhaps at 96th/Amsterdam with a transfer from there to the (1)/(2)/(3) that would re-activate the old stairwells to the (1)/(2)/(3) at 96th and Broadway (but ONLY as a transfer to the ) that were closed when the new entrance to the Broadway-7th Avenue line at 96th Street opened. If you're going to have a train join the SAS from the Eastern Division, I would do that via Chrystie and the Williamsburg Bridge from the Broadway-Brooklyn line. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GarbageTruckJuice Posted January 21, 2012 Share #24 Posted January 21, 2012 we'll be teleporting before any of that happens. nice map though B+ for effort. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TwoTimer Posted January 21, 2012 Share #25 Posted January 21, 2012 Hums... "meet the Jetsons"... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.