Second Avenue Subway Discussion

[bobtehpanda]

I think it's because the section was built with the purpose of being used for the 2nd Avenue line.

 

Personally, I'm more in favor of the so-called teacup option that takes the line down Avenue B/C and avoids Chrystie St entirely.

 

If I remember, they did actually consider that in the Alternatives Analysis, but the time penalty that the detour would've required would detract from the original purpose, which was to decongest the Lex (which is also why, in addition to the disruption, the other options were rejected.)

 

There's supposed to be an underground siding at 21-9th Sts as part of Phase III. Ideally, I would like to see that turned into a spur heading east on 9th St with a stop at Tompkins Sq park before going to Williamsburg and then Utica Av in lieu of the teacup option.

[Lance]

That works too.

[onthe1train]

From what I've gathered here, there seems to be an obsession with sending at least one 2nd Av train through Montague and down 4th Av to supplement the R. There are already changes in progress (i.e. QBL CBTC, N express in Manhattan) that are going to indirectly improve service to Bay Ridge. Trying to force track connections via 2nd Av just complicates things when there are other options to send trains to areas that don't even have service at all. We get it, the R sucks, and it should be looked into, but 2nd Av trains are not the solution.

 

I completely agree with the deep Chrystie / Water St option and as bobtehpanda mentioned, eventually having a spur to Williamsburg / Utica Av.

 

Either way, these changes aren't going to happen for a long time, but forcing 2nd Av trains through Montague is too disruptive. 

[Caelestor]

I have no idea why people on this forum are so allergic to the deep Chrystie, Water St option. It's the only option that doesn't require evicting a neighborhood.

 

I don't mind the deep Chrystie option, but I'm not fond of the Water St route for a couple of reasons. Spending $2 billion on the 2 Downtown stations which are very close to other stops is disappointing, especially since neither of which offer any connections to other lines. I think Chatham Sq is fine though. More importantly, the lack of a connection via an existing tunnel to Brooklyn on the south end decreases flexibility and lowers the possibility of a 63rd St - 2nd Ave - Brooklyn service. I can't imagine another lower Manhattan - Brooklyn tunnel being built for a while.

 

That said, I acknowledge that any alternative via Nassau St, which offers a superior route, might be too technically challenging, so I've dropped talking about Phase 4 much until Phase 3 is underway.

[Around the Horn]

There's supposed to be an underground siding at 21-9th Sts as part of Phase III. Ideally, I would like to see that turned into a spur heading east on 9th St with a stop at Tompkins Sq park before going to Williamsburg and then Utica Av in lieu of the teacup option.

What if the continues down Second Avenue to Hanover Sq and the branches at say 14th or 23th running down Avenue A, connecting to the and becoming the Culver Local (in light of recent events )?

 

Although I like your idea too...

[bobtehpanda]

I don't mind the deep Chrystie option, but I'm not fond of the Water St route for a couple of reasons. Spending $2 billion on the 2 Downtown stations which are very close to other stops is disappointing, especially since neither of which offer any connections to other lines. I think Chatham Sq is fine though. More importantly, the lack of a connection via an existing tunnel to Brooklyn on the south end decreases flexibility and lowers the possibility of a 63rd St - 2nd Ave - Brooklyn service. I can't imagine another lower Manhattan - Brooklyn tunnel being built for a while.

 

That said, I acknowledge that any alternative via Nassau St, which offers a superior route, might be too technically challenging, so I've dropped talking about Phase 4 much until Phase 3 is underway.

 

If I remember correctly, due to the Water St rezoning that happened back when they were thinking SAS would actually be built in the '70s, Water St is now the densest corridor of offices, and it doesn't even have a subway. I think that Grand St and Chrystie St are super-important; but once you get that far south, you're basically stuck with Water/Chrystie.

 

My issue with Nassau St is that it basically caps SAS capacity at whatever is going on in the southern end (Nassau St, DeKalb). The way SAS Phase IV is planned for building right now (deep underneath all existing crossings), I'm pretty sure long-term the idea will be to hook it into Fulton Local (easiest) or the Atlantic Branch (significantly harder).

 

What if the continues down Second Avenue to Hanover Sq and the branches at say 14th or 23th running down Avenue A, connecting to the and becoming the Culver Local (in light of recent events )?

 

Although I like your idea too...

 

We have more pressing needs than the areas of South Brooklyn which already have subway service.

[Around the Horn]

We have more pressing needs than the areas of South Brooklyn which already have subway service.

I'm aware of that. I was responding to the discussion about that track map that was posted...

[Caelestor]

I'm aware of that. I was responding to the discussion about that track map that was posted...

 

In light of the recent push for the Culver express, establishing a link between SAS and the doesn't seem so bad anymore.

 

 

If I remember correctly, due to the Water St rezoning that happened back when they were thinking SAS would actually be built in the '70s, Water St is now the densest corridor of offices, and it doesn't even have a subway. I think that Grand St and Chrystie St are super-important; but once you get that far south, you're basically stuck with Water/Chrystie.

 

My issue with Nassau St is that it basically caps SAS capacity at whatever is going on in the southern end (Nassau St, DeKalb). The way SAS Phase IV is planned for building right now (deep underneath all existing crossings), I'm pretty sure long-term the idea will be to hook it into Fulton Local (easiest) or the Atlantic Branch (significantly harder).

 

Makes sense. Honestly, if the Hanover Sq station was relocated under Broad St to offer a transfer to Whitehall St, Phase 4 would have much more potential.

 

I'm actually not so certain Fulton St is easy to connect, since Schermerhorn St dead-ends at Clinton St. I think a tunnel would have to run under Atlantic Ave initially and then somehow rejoin the Fulton St line.

Edited May 17, 2016 by Caelestor

[bobtehpanda]

In light of the recent push for the Culver express, establishing a link between SAS and the doesn't seem so bad anymore.

 

 

 

Makes sense. Honestly, if the Hanover Sq station was relocated under Broad St to offer a transfer to Whitehall St, Phase 4 would have much more potential.

 

I'm actually not so certain Fulton St is easy to connect, since Schermerhorn St dead-ends at Clinton St. I think a tunnel would have to run under Atlantic Ave initially and then somehow rejoin the Fulton St line.

 

Boerum Place is big enough, but you'd probably take the Transit Museum out of commission for a while, if not permanently. You could also use Clinton St, but that would require more takings (although it would be minimal if you went deep)

 

Other places (which are older and tighter, like London, Amsterdam, Berlin, etc.) all dive under buildings without problem. 

Edited May 18, 2016 by bobtehpanda

[Javier]

Speaking of which, phase 2 extends the from 96th to 125th under Lexingiton right? What about running it next to the until 145th then let it branch off to 161st street, then to Coop-Op city?

[P3F]

Honestly that's just not a good way to provide service to Co-op city...

[Metro CSW]

Speaking of which, phase 2 extends the from 96th to 125th under Lexingiton right? What about running it next to the until 145th then let it branch off to 161st street, then to Coop-Op city?

Under Second Avenue actually not Lex. lmao, I hope that was a typo xD. And no because:

1) The already parallels the ABCD in the West side.

2) That's a wasteful extension and may as well just have it run straight under the Third Avenue Bridge instead of curving around Harlem.... (125-St. Nicholas-161 tunnel = no...)

 

Sent from my SM-G920P using Tapatalk

[Union Tpke]

Speaking of which, phase 2 extends the from 96th to 125th under Lexingiton right? What about running it next to the until 145th then let it branch off to 161st street, then to Coop-Op city?

 

NO! Just extend the one stop. It is a simple as that.

[Around the Horn]

It's happening!

 

Phase 1 of the SAS is now 93.5 % complete as of the now posted station area newsletters on the SAS webpage(http://web.mta.info/capital/docs_sas_alt.html)

[Union Tpke]

Screen Shot 2016-05-21 at 9.45.58 PM by spicker613, on Flickr

[CenSin]

Screen Shot 2016-05-21 at 9.45.58 PM by spicker613, on Flickr

Wow. I’m witnessing history. I wonder if my grandkids will ever see a subway line being built. LOL

[Javier]

I was thinking of a new plan:

 

What if the could become the new Second Avenue Local? I was thinking in the process of Phase 3, there could be tracks that connect to Essex St on tracks J1 and J2, which could allow the to run up 2nd Avenue to 125th St. (Assuming 125th St will be an actual station.)

[bobtehpanda]

I was thinking of a new plan:

 

What if the could become the new Second Avenue Local? I was thinking in the process of Phase 3, there could be tracks that connect to Essex St on tracks J1 and J2, which could allow the to run up 2nd Avenue to 125th St. (Assuming 125th St will be an actual station.)

 

The fact that the isn't an actual separate train service aside, that'd basically require shutting down the area east of Essex St for an extended period of time, which is why the MTA has never wanted to do any of the Nassau St options.

[Javier]

Aren't there bellmouths at Essex, as well as an entire empty trolley terminal? By doing this you would only need to shut down Essex St for two weekend's for 2 weeks. All switches are tethered onto tracks J1 and J2, along with a 4 track yard. This way you increase TPH on both Second AV and Nassau, as well as making the a perm service.

[bobtehpanda]

Aren't there bellmouths at Essex, as well as an entire empty trolley terminal? By doing this you would only need to shut down Essex St for two weekend's for 2 weeks. All switches are tethered onto tracks J1 and J2, along with a 4 track yard. This way you increase TPH on both Second AV and Nassau, as well as making the a perm service.

 

This already exists in the space for the Trolley Terminal.

 

Well, no. At the very least, to connect to Second Avenue you need to build an extra pair of tracks going onto Chrystie St. So you just disrupted the and together.

 

It also doesn't actually increase TPH. TPH on Second Avenue is going to be the same as every other piece of track; 30TPH. Theoretically speaking, if you designed Hanover Square appropriately you could turn all 30TPH at Hanover Sq. You don't actually need the or any other train alongside the to boost frequency.

[Wallyhorse]

This already exists in the space for the Trolley Terminal.

 

Well, no. At the very least, to connect to Second Avenue you need to build an extra pair of tracks going onto Chrystie St. So you just disrupted the and together.

 

It also doesn't actually increase TPH. TPH on Second Avenue is going to be the same as every other piece of track; 30TPH. Theoretically speaking, if you designed Hanover Square appropriately you could turn all 30TPH at Hanover Sq. You don't actually need the or any other train alongside the to boost frequency.

And my plan with Hanover Square is to have it so it also would feed into a new Schermerhorn Street Tunnel that would take the into Brooklyn via Fulton and be the Fulton Local while the and can both be Fulton Express lines, allowing for more TPH along Fulton, both local and express.  

 

Aren't there bellmouths at Essex, as well as an entire empty trolley terminal? By doing this you would only need to shut down Essex St for two weekend's for 2 weeks. All switches are tethered onto tracks J1 and J2, along with a 4 track yard. This way you increase TPH on both Second AV and Nassau, as well as making the a perm service.

Better idea is the one already proposed in this forum for Phase 3 that would have a new line labeled operate via the SAS to Houston and then connect to the Rutgers Tunnel and via Culver Express to Coney Island.  That likely requires moving the SAS to 1st Avenue around 23rd Street and:

 

Making the transfer to the at 1st Avenue rather than at 3rd Avenue if so.

 

After Houston, Phase 4 would have the (main SAS line) running on Allen Street instead of Chrystie until East Broadway, where it would then run via East Broadway to Chatam Square and then along the planned route to Hanover Square.

[Mysterious2train]

Screen Shot 2016-05-21 at 9.45.58 PM by spicker613, on Flickr

 

Ha! It's been a month so I guess that means it's time for another delay on the Lexington Av-63 St renovation

 

 

Congressman Maloney also released her report card for the project. I think it's a decent analysis of the MTA's efforts, except for the part which pretty much copy-pastes from MTA presentations because it sounds so stilted. 

[Javier]

Wally, SAS is only a TWO TRACK LINE THAT REQUIRES ONLY TWO SUBWAY SERVICES.

(I'm not yelling at you.)

 

My idea needs a little more work, but the MTA has to build a new tunnel sooner or later. What I was thinking is extending the Mountague Tunnle to 4 tracks, with both SAS and 4th Avenue servicing it.

[Union Tpke]

Wally, SAS is only a TWO TRACK LINE THAT REQUIRES ONLY TWO SUBWAY SERVICES.

(I'm not yelling at you.)

 

My idea needs a little more work, but the MTA has to build a new tunnel sooner or later. What I was thinking is extending the Mountague Tunnle to 4 tracks, with both SAS and 4th Avenue servicing it.

 

Then why are you using all Caps. That indicates shouting.

[Javier]

Not helping Union.