Future of Southern Brooklyn/IRT Nostrand

[bobtehpanda]

Reducing noise on an el is the best option. First of all, the cost of building a subway is sky-high. Paying bilions for a subway that will only go about 6 stops is absolutely a idiotic idea. Second, an el line would be billions cheaper. It isnt just the cost, building an elevated line makes health hazards are lower than building a subway (no dust). An el would also be quiet, not as noisy as yesterday's el's. Look at other cities; their new els. They are very quiet, due to new technology. Elevated railways are the option.

 

Other cities don't build els right up to building walls.

 

You guys are forgetting that Nostrand is no Van Wyck or Queens Blvd - it's two sidewalks, two parking lanes and two car lanes. This is somewhere in the neighborhood of 50-60 feet. Two train tracks takes up at least 16-20 feet, and station platforms, not including mezzanines, gives you another 10-20 feet (for side platforms - you could probably BS a 15 ft island platform). 60 minus 30 (a generous estimate, might I add) is 15 feet of clearance on each side. Now, yes, els are cheaper and less obstructive these days, but no city in the modern era has built an el that close to residential buildings. There is also no way you're widening Nostrand, so the problem is that even with modern practices, an el cannot fit into Nostrand's ROW in a reasonable manner. (This also doesn't account for things like flyovers, portals, and holding tracks, to say the least.) Flatbush is a bit better, because there's an extra two lanes (20 feet of space, which is an additional 10 feet on each side), but that's still just 25 feet away from windows where people work, eat, and shop.

 

Els in developed countries (not including Japan) are largely on wide roads with medians, or in separate ROWs, with a sizable amount of space between the tracks and any buildings. No one in their right minds would build a new El in a densely populated area this close to buildings. Don't expect the community on Nostrand to put up with an El.

[Roadcruiser1]

Other cities don't build els right up to building walls.

 

You guys are forgetting that Nostrand is no Van Wyck or Queens Blvd - it's two sidewalks, two parking lanes and two car lanes. This is somewhere in the neighborhood of 50-60 feet. Two train tracks takes up at least 16-20 feet, and station platforms, not including mezzanines, gives you another 10-20 feet (for side platforms - you could probably BS a 15 ft island platform). 60 minus 30 (a generous estimate, might I add) is 15 feet of clearance on each side. Now, yes, els are cheaper and less obstructive these days, but no city in the modern era has built an el that close to residential buildings. There is also no way you're widening Nostrand, so the problem is that even with modern practices, an el cannot fit into Nostrand's ROW in a reasonable manner. (This also doesn't account for things like flyovers, portals, and holding tracks, to say the least.) Flatbush is a bit better, because there's an extra two lanes (20 feet of space, which is an additional 10 feet on each side), but that's still just 25 feet away from windows where people work, eat, and shop.

 

Els in developed countries (not including Japan) are largely on wide roads with medians, or in separate ROWs, with a sizable amount of space between the tracks and any buildings. No one in their right minds would build a new El in a densely populated area this close to buildings. Don't expect the community on Nostrand to put up with an El.

 

Well you could build it so it would be higher than most buildings. Something like the Culver Viaduct, but it would cost more.

[Vistausss]

What's with this huge gap at the end of all of your posts?

 

I don't know but it happens since a few weeks. It's really frustrating for me too. I do my best to edit those posts afterwards and remove all the whitespace but I really don't know what causes it. It's seriously been doing this since a few weeks, same web browser, same add-ons, nothing's changed at my end.

 

Els in developed countries (not including Japan) are largely on wide roads with medians, or in separate ROWs, with a sizable amount of space between the tracks and any buildings. No one in their right minds would build a new El in a densely populated area this close to buildings. Don't expect the community on Nostrand to put up with an El.

 

And not only Japan. Even in NYC it has been done like that. Go take a look at AirTrain

[bobtehpanda]

I don't know but it happens since a few weeks. It's really frustrating for me too. I do my best to edit those posts afterwards and remove all the whitespace but I really don't know what causes it. It's seriously been doing this since a few weeks, same web browser, same add-ons, nothing's changed at my end.

 

 

 

And not only Japan. Even in NYC it has been done like that. Go take a look at AirTrain

 

I think you misunderstood the point - yes, in areas outside of Japan, elevated heavy rail is making a resurgence, but it's almost always either in a private ROW with a sizable land buffer, or in the 10-foot wide median of a six-eight lane arterial, not counting parking lanes and sidewalks. Even the AirTrain was built on a wide highway without frontage from residential properties.

 

Nostrand definitely does not have room for an El, and even squeezing one into Flatbush is tricky, unless you want to make the platforms narrower than a sidewalk. This is not the early 1900s - not even today's working class people would be comfortable with trains running every few minutes less than fourty feet away from their windows from 5AM-7PM five days a week.

 

(Not to mention, the IRT in Brooklyn is also at capacity, and any sort of service expansion would be impossible without rebuilding the flat junction at Nostrand.)

[BrooklynBus]

The Nostrand Avenue Elevated would look something like this. This is the Vancouver Skytrain Canada Line. It won't look anything like the elevated lines of the past.

 

 

No it would not. Just compare the widths of te two right of ways. Do you propose tearing down all the homes and businesses along Nostrand?

[Grand Concourse]

He meant an example of an el structure, nothing about tearing down any buildings. But even so it shows that it's not practical to build an el on Nostrand because the structure would practically be right next to the buildings.

[BrooklynBus]

He meant an example of an el structure, nothing about tearing down any buildings. But even so it shows that it's not practical to build an el on Nostrand because the structure would practically be right next to the buildings.

 

Right.  What I don't understand is why he had to go all the way to Vancouver for an example of a nice looking el.  He could have just said 'just like Airtrain or shown a picture of it over the Van Wyck.

[bobtehpanda]

Right.  What I don't understand is why he had to go all the way to Vancouver for an example of a nice looking el.  He could have just said 'just like Airtrain or shown a picture of it over the Van Wyck.

 

One could say that the Vanocuver els are designed for an urban environment, and their footprint is optimized (or at least the impact is minimized) on the built environment. Their station design isn't too shabby, either.

 

You can't really say that about AirTrain, because the amount of aesthetic work put into it is the minimum required to integrate the AirTrain into its surroundings - namely, a six to eight lane highway which is congested at nearly all hours of the day. From one perspective, using the SkyTrain as an example is overly flattering, but from another, the AirTrain isn't an example of optimal urban rapid transit design.

[Grand Concourse]

Yup. I doubt an extension of the 2/5 as an el would be using platform doors for one or there being a single column in the middle (similar to the segment over the Van Wyck) holding up the structure taking over the street.

[Metro CSW]

As I always do say: "One city has nothing to do with other."

[Roadcruiser1]

Again like I said. Why can't we just build the elevated line to be higher than most buildings? Then it would impact the neighborhood less than today's elevated lines.

[Grand Concourse]

And how high are we talking about? Smith-9th? I highly doubt it. Escalators are a pita to maintain as they are usually broken and then you add a series of them... nope. They should be no higher than the standard els in the city.

[bobtehpanda]

Again like I said. Why can't we just build the elevated line to be higher than most buildings? Then it would impact the neighborhood less than today's elevated lines.

 

There's still the issue of station egress - it's not exactly a walk in the park to exit a station 50 or so feet in the air. Not to mention, with ADA (which is federal law, like it or not), you'd need an elevator shaft that high as well. At that point, you might as well prefab concrete sections of tunnel, dig up the street, and then drop them in. Since this is basically how every sewer tunnel in the world is designed, it shouldn't be hard to scale up, nor should it be subject to warping due to a high-water table (after all, sewers are designed to handle large amounts of water in the ground...)

[Roadcruiser1]

And how high are we talking about? Smith-9th? I highly doubt it. Escalators are a pita to maintain as they are usually broken and then you add a series of them... nope. They should be no higher than the standard els in the city.

 

Well after taking a look on Google Maps and walking down Nostrand Avenue virtually such an elevated line would be around 40-50 feet since most of the buildings in the neighborhood are no more than 30-40 feet from street to roof height. In general it would be higher than a normal elevated line. The West End Line for example is only about 15 feet up from the street.

[Vistausss]

 

 

 

 

 

I still vote for cut and cover. Cheap, fast, out of sight and ADA accessible. Everyone wins that way.

[Grand Concourse]

Well not for Nostrand av, ground isn't stable enough for a tunnel. That said I still say Flatbush av makes more sense for the IRT extension.

[BrooklynBus]

Well not for Nostrand av, ground isn't stable enough for a tunnel. That said I still say Flatbush av makes more sense for the IRT extension.

You know in the 1960s for a short time the City did switch the proposal from a Utica and Nostrand Avenue Line to. Flatbush Line instead. It did not go over well. So they switched back to two separate lines. And you know the rest of the story.

[peacemak3r]

Well after taking a look on Google Maps and walking down Nostrand Avenue virtually such an elevated line would be around 40-50 feet since most of the buildings in the neighborhood are no more than 30-40 feet from street to roof height. In general it would be higher than a normal elevated line. The West End Line for example is only about 15 feet up from the street.

 

You can't solely use Google Maps for these kind of things.  I'd say 60% of the buildings along Nostrand, specifically between Ave K through Ave M and Kings Highway through Ave U are at least 6-7 floors high.  I live along this road.  Secondly, Nostrand Ave is probably only wide enough for an EL from Kings Highway to Gerristan Ave and that's like half a block.

 

--

 

Also, I haven't looked at this thread after my post, but to answer a previous question, most of Flatbush Ave traffic are from Belt Parkway and the Rockaways heading towards the Manhattan bridge and vice versa.  Most of Nostrand Ave traffic are just school buses and the high amount of B44's and neighborhood traffic, let alone college students driving around as well.

[Vistausss]

Well not for Nostrand av, ground isn't stable enough for a tunnel. That said I still say Flatbush av makes more sense for the IRT extension.

 

If the ground isn't stable enough then I wonder how they could've built ENY LIRR... Btw, I know what the ground is made of. It's the same kind of ground that's used in the town where I live. Also, you know what ground Schiphol tunnel+railway station (Amsterdam Airport) is built in? Also the same kind of ground. So 2 things in my country which are built on/in that ground and ENY in the area of NoStrand... It's possible.

[BrooklynIRT]

You can't solely use Google Maps for these kind of things.  I'd say 60% of the buildings along Nostrand, specifically between Ave K through Ave M and Kings Highway through Ave U are at least 6-7 floors high.  I live along this road.  Secondly, Nostrand Ave is probably only wide enough for an EL from Kings Highway to Gerristan Ave and that's like half a block.

 

--

 

Also, I haven't looked at this thread after my post, but to answer a previous question, most of Flatbush Ave traffic are from Belt Parkway and the Rockaways heading towards the Manhattan bridge and vice versa.  Most of Nostrand Ave traffic are just school buses and the high amount of B44's and neighborhood traffic, let alone college students driving around as well.

 

I was trying to figure out how much of that traffic a train line would take out. I was really interested in the traffic around JCT and thought the traffic pileups around JCT had a lot to do with the fact that there is no train south of JCT on Nostrand or Flatbush. I notice traffic pileups even on the northbound side of Nostrand approaching Flatbush quite often. do you know if a lot of people who drive from one end of Flatbush Ave to the other do so to get to/from Jersey or upstate?

[CenSin]

Nostrand Ave is probably only wide enough for an EL from Kings Highway to Gerristan Ave and that's like half a block.

Anyone thinking of a double-decked structure—one track on each level?

[bobtehpanda]

Well not for Nostrand av, ground isn't stable enough for a tunnel. That said I still say Flatbush av makes more sense for the IRT extension.

 

I mean, the foundations of the Brooklyn Bridge piers are literally held up by nothing except loose sand, and the Tappan Zee is built over the widest, least stable part of the Hudson, so it's not like New York City's transport infrastructure has ever been especially concerned with the surrounding geology's suitability...

 

Is this something that a concrete-lined tunnel, whether cut or cover or done with TBMs, couldn't solve?

 

Anyone thinking of a double-decked structure—one track on each level?

 

Don't we want to minimize the visual impact of els on neighborhoods? Not to mention, you'd need a double-height ramp down into the Flatbush Av station...

[Grand Concourse]

Well I'm sure a tbm can be used, but that's going to be very costly to bring in and unfortunately I don't think the ridership would justify the cost of it. That's why if it is a subway here in Brooklyn, it should be cut and cover IMO.

 

As for the nixing of FB av, that was then, this is now. Maybe people are more willing to have a line down there than Nostrand? If the irt extension can't work out, then may as well look over to the Utica av ind extension/branching off the Fulton ind.

[Roadcruiser1]

At Utica Avenue we are presented with the same problems. The plans in the 30's and the 50's also called for an elevated line in the southern section of Utica Avenue, because the ground caused the same problems. You can't really navigate out of this problem.

 

It seems like the only way out of this problem would be to use Flatbush Avenue. It's wider, and due to that it seems easier to build an elevated line.

[bobtehpanda]

Well I'm sure a tbm can be used, but that's going to be very costly to bring in and unfortunately I don't think the ridership would justify the cost of it. That's why if it is a subway here in Brooklyn, it should be cut and cover IMO.

 

As for the nixing of FB av, that was then, this is now. Maybe people are more willing to have a line down there than Nostrand? If the irt extension can't work out, then may as well look over to the Utica av ind extension/branching off the Fulton ind.

 

The parallel bus route carries over 40k riders a day, and a train extension is almost certainly going to attract more people than a comparatively slower bus ride, not to mention it will draw people from intersecting bus lines and the new development that will inevitably come with the building of such a line. Nostrand and Utica are both surrounded by fairly dense development (which is why subway extensions there are contemplated in the first place, and also the reason why an el isn't going to go down well.)

 

TBM projects are not inherently expensive - the ARC, ESA, and SAS tunneling portions probably made up less than half the cost, and maybe even less than a third, of each project's respective costs. Regional transit projects are expensive mostly because of station work, and that will have to be at least partially cut-and-cover anyways. SAS is building full-length mezzanines underneath some of the hardest bedrock and most expensive property in the world, ESA is blasting a giant hole into the same bedrock under even more expensive property, and ARC would've done the exact same thing. Nothing is cheap at an agency that puts the sticker price of an above-ground elevator that goes up a level at $10M.