Jump to content

L Train Service Between Brooklyn & Manhattan May Be Shut Down For Years


RollOver

Recommended Posts

Run the (L) From Canarsie to Bedford or Lorimer You can break some of the traffic flow up along the (G) via the (E)(M)(7) In Queens the and (M) at Myrtle. Once again the MTA should look into creating a Bus Bridge from Lorimer Street to 14th (Non Stop) Via the BQE, Williamsburg Bridge and Allen with the help of the DOT they have enough time to get something in place. And lastly bump the B32 service with  (G)(E)(J)(M) access and Ferry service along the waterfront. You might be able to better disperse a quarter million people over four or five different alternatives Full closure seems likely at this point..

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Replies 532
  • Created
  • Last Reply

I'm all for the quick method, just a matter if the TA decides to do a full shutdown and will risk losing Williamsburg customers. That all I am worrying about now.

 Shouldn't we be looking at this more like a natural disaster. I'm sure when most of the infrastructure of New York was built in early 20th century they could never imagine a storm like Sandy. It was beyond human control they might lose some ridership but once the work is done the ridership will bounce back and probably with a vengeance. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Run the L From Canarsie to Bedford or Lorimer You can break some of the traffic flow up along the G via the E/M/7 In Queens the and M at Myrtle. Once again the MTA should look into creating a Bus Bridge from Lorimer Street to 14th (Non Stop) Via the BQE, Williamsburg Bridge and Allen with the help of the DOT they have enough time to get something in place. And lastly bump the B32 service with  G/E/J/M access and Ferry service along the waterfront. You might be able to better disperse a quarter million people over four or five different alternatives Full closure seems likely at this point..

Court Square is where a lot of people will go, but then you have the overcrowding problems there, which is one of the reasons why I suggested:

 

Beefing up the (M) with my "Orange (T)" to 96th Street/2nd Avenue that would actually run 24/7.

 

Adding three new OOS transfers from the (G) at:

 

Broadway for (currently) the (J)(M)(Z) at Hewes Street.

 

Fulton for BOTH the (C) at Lafayette Avenue AND the (2)(3)(4)(5)(B)(D)(N)(Q)(R) and by then possibly (W) at Atlantic-Barclays) in the hope of discouraging some to go to Court Square and instead go the other way.

 

I'd also be looking at truncating the (L) to between Broadway Junction and Bedford during this (so it can focus on the much more heavily traveled portion of the (L) ) and from Canarsie run a line via Broadway-Brooklyn to Manhattan to both take many Canarsie riders off the (L) and to deal with potential overcrowding on the (J) between Broadway Junction and Marcy.  Whether that is an additional line (most likely designated (K) ) as some have suggested elsewhere to Broad Street or as I have suggested elsewhere a re-routed (C) between Rockaway Parkway and 168 (originally listed here as an example that would require additional changes), the purpose is to spread out the pain as much as possible and keep as many people off the (L) to the (G) to Court Square in particular as realistically possible. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Court Square is where a lot of people will go, but then you have the overcrowding problems there, which is one of the reasons why I suggested:

 

Beefing up the (M) with my "Orange (T)" to 96th Street/2nd Avenue that would actually run 24/7.

 

Adding three new OOS transfers from the (G) at:

 

Broadway for (currently) the (J)(M)(Z) at Hewes Street.

 

Fulton for BOTH the (C) at Lafayette Avenue AND the (2)(3)(4)(5)(B)(D)(N)(Q)(R) and by then possibly (W) at Atlantic-Barclays) in the hope of discouraging some to go to Court Square and instead go the other way.

 

I'd also be looking at truncating the (L) to between Broadway Junction and Bedford during this (so it can focus on the much more heavily traveled portion of the (L) ) and from Canarsie run a line via Broadway-Brooklyn to Manhattan to both take many Canarsie riders off the (L) and to deal with potential overcrowding on the (J) between Broadway Junction and Marcy. Whether that is an additional line (most likely designated (K) ) as some have suggested elsewhere to Broad Street or as I have suggested elsewhere a re-routed (C) between Rockaway Parkway and 168 (originally listed here as an example that would require additional changes), the purpose is to spread out the pain as much as possible and keep as many people off the (L) to the (G) to Court Square in particular as realistically possible.

Jesus effin' Christ...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, that's going to be the reaction no matter what in this case.

 

I'm just simply trying to cut down on crush loads as much as possible by spreading this out as much as it can be done realistically.

Try coming up with something that is logical and reasonable and not taking another letter from a future line first then come back here.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, that's going to be the reaction no matter what in this case.

 

I'm just simply trying to cut down on crush loads as much as possible by spreading this out as much as it can be done realistically. 

The starting point should be the (L) ridership starting points and destinations. And then work backwards.. are ppl coming/going to Lower Manhattan? Queens, Midtown? What's the data on that?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would completely shut down the (L) in Manhattan with a special "M14L" bus bridge along 14 Street connecting to Delancey-Essex (Maybe have (L) trains from Canarsie run to Essex Street for the transfer and a Bedford Avenue to Broadway Jct shuttle?) and running over the Willamsburg Bridge to Bridge Plaza and Bedford Av and Lorimer St stations.

 

1 Avenue can get its Avenue A entrance and 3 Avenue could get a 2 Avenue entrance (future proofed for SAS) with both stations becoming ADA accessible.

 

 We could build tail tracks west of 8th Avenue (two terminating tracks plus a pocket track) and maybe a 10 Avenue station at the Chelsea Market and give stations a freshening up the way Montague stations got one during the weekend closures plus give workers 24/7 access to the Canarsie tubes to finish the work and get out of there.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would completely shut down the (L) in Manhattan with a special "M14L" bus bridge along 14 Street connecting to Delancey-Essex (Maybe have (L) trains from Canarsie run to Essex Street for the transfer and a Bedford Avenue to Broadway Jct shuttle?) and running over the Willamsburg Bridge to Bridge Plaza and Bedford Av and Lorimer St stations.

 

1 Avenue can get its Avenue A entrance and 3 Avenue could get a 2 Avenue entrance (future proofed for SAS) with both stations becoming ADA accessible.

 

 We could build tail tracks west of 8th Avenue (two terminating tracks plus a pocket track) and maybe a 10 Avenue station at the Chelsea Market and give stations a freshening up the way Montague stations got one during the weekend closures plus give workers 24/7 access to the Canarsie tubes to finish the work and get out of there.

Lorimer would be a good selection direct entrance and exits to the BQE for a bus bridge. Tail tracks would add a few more TPH on top of CBTC.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Doesn't even need to be full tail tracks, you could get a nice TPH boost with just a few yards extension.

True. by doing that, trains could enter the station at quicker speeds, which can reduce the (superhero) time spent in the station.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, that's going to be the reaction no matter what in this case.

 

I'm just simply trying to cut down on crush loads as much as possible by spreading this out as much as it can be done realistically.

You're now subjecting people south of Broadway Junction to an extra seat ride for what reason

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You're now subjecting people south of Broadway Junction to an extra seat ride for what reason

The idea is to focus the (L) on the MUCH more heavily ridden portion between Broadway Junction and in this case Bedford Avenue.

 

Sure, some riders from Canarsie would be inconvenienced, but if they transfer anyway at Broadway Junction they would still do so while if they normally take the Broadway-Brooklyn line from there anyway they now have a one-seat ride through that part.  

 

The "Bus Bridges" between Brooklyn and Manhattan I do think will be needed if at all possible, but I would also look at a special express bus shuttle that would begin at Myrtle-Wyckoff and stop only at Myrtle-Broadway before then running non-stop to Atlantic Avenue-Barclays Center where people can transfer to the lines there plus the OOS transfers to/from the (C) and (G) as well.    I would as well look at doing an express bus shuttle the other way from Myrtle-Wyckoff to 71st-Continental (no stops) for those looking for Midtown.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The idea is to focus the (L) on the MUCH more heavily ridden portion between Broadway Junction and in this case Bedford Avenue.

 

Sure, some riders from Canarsie would be inconvenienced, but if they transfer anyway at Broadway Junction they would still do so while if they normally take the Broadway-Brooklyn line from there anyway they now have a one-seat ride through that part.  

 

The "Bus Bridges" between Brooklyn and Manhattan I do think will be needed if at all possible, but I would also look at a special express bus shuttle that would begin at Myrtle-Wyckoff and stop only at Myrtle-Broadway before then running non-stop to Atlantic Avenue-Barclays Center where people can transfer to the lines there plus the OOS transfers to/from the (C) and (G) as well.    I would as well look at doing an express bus shuttle the other way from Myrtle-Wyckoff to 71st-Continental (no stops) for those looking for Midtown.

The only way a bus bridge is going to work is if it can work at the very minimum SBS levels or better. All the routes you proposed are at the mercy of local traffic.. no need to over complicate in my opinion. This would really just be a extension of the M14A with a (Non stop) from 2nd ave and 14th to Essex street (F)(J)(M) via the M15's bus lanes. and a direct run over the Bridge and off at exit 32 to Lorimer (G)(L). All that's really needed is a Bus lane on 14th and a dedicated Bus lane on the Bridge at least at peak times. Only limit I can see is the amount to buses maybe needed and available. 

 

Route breakdown

 

- All stops via bus lane on 14th street.

 

(Via SBS M15)

 

- Essex (F)(M)(J)

 

(Express via BQE)

 

-Lorimer (G)(L)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The idea is to focus the (L) on the MUCH more heavily ridden portion between Broadway Junction and in this case Bedford Avenue.

 

Sure, some riders from Canarsie would be inconvenienced, but if they transfer anyway at Broadway Junction they would still do so while if they normally take the Broadway-Brooklyn line from there anyway they now have a one-seat ride through that part.

 

The "Bus Bridges" between Brooklyn and Manhattan I do think will be needed if at all possible, but I would also look at a special express bus shuttle that would begin at Myrtle-Wyckoff and stop only at Myrtle-Broadway before then running non-stop to Atlantic Avenue-Barclays Center where people can transfer to the lines there plus the OOS transfers to/from the (C) and (G) as well. I would as well look at doing an express bus shuttle the other way from Myrtle-Wyckoff to 71st-Continental (no stops) for those looking for Midtown.

So you're essentially robbing Peter (and Joseph, James, and Matthew) to pay Paul.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Court Square is where a lot of people will go, but then you have the overcrowding problems there, which is one of the reasons why I suggested:

 

Beefing up the (M) with my "Orange (T)" to 96th Street/2nd Avenue that would actually run 24/7.

 

Adding three new OOS transfers from the (G) at:

 

Broadway for (currently) the (J)(M)(Z) at Hewes Street.

 

Fulton for BOTH the (C) at Lafayette Avenue AND the (2)(3)(4)(5)(B)(D)(N)(Q)(R) and by then possibly (W) at Atlantic-Barclays) in the hope of discouraging some to go to Court Square and instead go the other way.

 

I'd also be looking at truncating the (L) to between Broadway Junction and Bedford during this (so it can focus on the much more heavily traveled portion of the (L) ) and from Canarsie run a line via Broadway-Brooklyn to Manhattan to both take many Canarsie riders off the (L) and to deal with potential overcrowding on the (J) between Broadway Junction and Marcy.  Whether that is an additional line (most likely designated (K) ) as some have suggested elsewhere to Broad Street or as I have suggested elsewhere a re-routed (C) between Rockaway Parkway and 168 (originally listed here as an example that would require additional changes), the purpose is to spread out the pain as much as possible and keep as many people off the (L) to the (G) to Court Square in particular as realistically possible. 

Now build a logic model to convince all the stakeholders that this works.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think they should take some of the 143s and put them on the (G) when this begins. That way they'll increase capacity and service on the crosstown line as an alternative travel option.

Then what would the (L) use? Remember, it still needs CBTC-equipped cars to run.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Then what would the (L) use? Remember, it still needs CBTC-equipped cars to run.

If the line is split or suspended completely in Manhattan, trains are freed up for use on the (G). At that point, whether or not an R143 or R160 is CBTC equipped is not much of an issue.

 

And where would the displaced hippos from the (G) go?

They wouldn't be displaced. The extra R143s would be added to the schedule to handle the extra passengers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If the line is split or suspended completely in Manhattan, trains are freed up for use on the (G). At that point, whether or not an R143 or R160 is CBTC equipped is not much of an issue.

 

They wouldn't be displaced. The extra R143s would be added to the schedule to handle the extra passengers.

It is an issue.

 

Without CBTC-equipped trains to use on the (L), the line would have to resort to using the regular wayside signals.

 

South of the Junction, that's not a problem. North of the Junction, a single signal block spans several stations. Absolute block takes effect, and you have headways comparable to overnight service.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It is an issue.

 

Without CBTC-equipped trains to use on the (L), the line would have to resort to using the regular wayside signals.

 

South of the Junction, that's not a problem. North of the Junction, a single signal block spans several stations. Absolute block takes effect, and you have headways comparable to overnight service.

 

I think that what they're trying to say is that if the (L) doesn't run under the river, the route is shorter and you need less trains to make the same frequency, so you can put the newly "excess" trains that would otherwise be running under the river and put them on the (G).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.