lupojohn Posted April 14, 2014 Share #1801 Posted April 14, 2014 (edited) It's not as bad as you're making it out to be... I've seen it first-hand. LMAO... Can't be any worse than the area over by Dyckman... Maybe you can come over from your penthouse at Henry Hudson Parkway and 239th to see for yourself since you've never been to Inwood, as you yourself stated . In all seriousness, comparing the two areas is an insult to the hard-working folks here. Edited April 14, 2014 by lupojohn 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Via Garibaldi 8 Posted April 14, 2014 Share #1802 Posted April 14, 2014 I've seen it first-hand. Maybe you can come over from your penthouse at Henry Hudson Parkway and 239th to see for yourself since you've never been to Inwood, as you yourself stated . In all seriousness, comparing the two areas is an insult to the hard-working folks here. Well actually I have been to Inwood, just not east of Broadway... The Cloisters is located in Inwood, and is lovely, but west of Broadway, which is like a different world. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lupojohn Posted April 14, 2014 Share #1803 Posted April 14, 2014 (edited) Well actually I have been to Inwood, just not east of Broadway... The Cloisters is located in Inwood, and is lovely, but west of Broadway, which is like a different world. Have you ever actually been to Dyckman Street itself? Edited April 14, 2014 by lupojohn 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fresh Pond Posted April 14, 2014 Share #1804 Posted April 14, 2014 I've seen it first-hand. My mother goes to church right on Bedford and Halsey, and my brother and his wife live on Franklin and Atlantic. I'm over there almost every weekend and have been for years and I can tell you it's not as bad as you're making it out to be... 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cl94 Posted April 15, 2014 Share #1805 Posted April 15, 2014 My mother goes to church right on Bedford and Halsey, and my brother and his wife live on Franklin and Atlantic. I'm over there almost every weekend and have been for years and I can tell you it's not as bad as you're making it out to be... It's a safe place to walk around during daylight hours, even if you're alone. I wouldn't say the same for 20 blocks east of there, in ENY, or in parts of Harlem and Washington Heights. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hwalker Posted April 15, 2014 Share #1806 Posted April 15, 2014 Since Red Hook has no subway service, I think that the should be extended into Red Hook and have ~3 stops there. That way, it wouldn't run along the for as long, where it's semi-useless. Also, they should extend the to Staten Island from Bay Ridge 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trainfanrod Posted April 15, 2014 Share #1807 Posted April 15, 2014 to Staten Island is not bad to me 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JFK Depot Posted April 15, 2014 Share #1808 Posted April 15, 2014 How would the R get to Staten Island really Via Verrazano Bridge or a newly built tunnel ? And then where would it terminate once in Staten Island ? I have an idea for the Staten Island Railway tho.. Establish the north shore already Get those tracks redone and build new stations New Brighton.. Livingston... West Brighton... Elm Park... Mariners Harbor... Arlington... Forest Ave... Goethals Rd... Bloomfield Teleport... West Shore Plaza 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NYSubwayBuff Posted April 16, 2014 Share #1809 Posted April 16, 2014 What if the R went via verrazano bridge to staten island and merged with the SIR (thus requiring the SIR to become a subway) would this be possible? Sent from my SPH-L710 using Tapatalk 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
darrylbaniaga38 Posted April 16, 2014 Share #1810 Posted April 16, 2014 Wasn't there that tunnel down in Bay Ridge that was started but never finished? It would make sense to finish it and connect the to Staten Island that way. But that's probably not going to happen in my lifetime. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DailyDose Posted April 16, 2014 Share #1811 Posted April 16, 2014 (edited) Co-Op City Shuttle Loop (Underground) Baychester Avenue Darrow Place (Baychester/Darrow) Dreiser Loop (Near Garvey School) Debs Place (Dreiser/Debs) DeKruif Place (DeKruif) Baychester Avenue (Near P.S 153) Hemmersly Avenue (Edson/Hemmersly) Burke Avenue (Edson/Burke) Givan Avenue (Edson/Givon) Baychester Avenue Edited April 16, 2014 by DailyDose 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CenSin Posted April 16, 2014 Share #1812 Posted April 16, 2014 Since Red Hook has no subway service, I think that the should be extended into Red Hook and have ~3 stops there. That way, it wouldn't run along the for as long, where it's semi-useless. Also, they should extend the to Staten Island from Bay Ridge The could then connect all the hipster communities! 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
realizm Posted April 16, 2014 Share #1813 Posted April 16, 2014 Wasn't there that tunnel down in Bay Ridge that was started but never finished? It would make sense to finish it and connect the to Staten Island that way. But that's probably not going to happen in my lifetime. Yup, evident by an unfinished spur immediately south of 59th Street, and the underground bridge north of Bay Ridge Ave, its four tracks not two which is both visible if you railfan the , overengineering on the part of the Dual Contracts engineers in prep for the SI tunnel. There is also a closed up bellmouth under Owls Head park south of 95th St by the Verrazano Narrows Bridge. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fresh Pond Posted April 16, 2014 Share #1814 Posted April 16, 2014 What if the R went via verrazano bridge to staten island and merged with the SIR (thus requiring the SIR to become a subway) would this be possible? Sent from my SPH-L710 using Tapatalk The VZ bridge wasn't designed for rail traffic in the first place. Although the bridge is fairly young compared to the others in the city (built in 64 or something like that), it would still cost way to much to convert it to handle trains. The bridge approaches are steep enough as it is for cars 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lupojohn Posted April 16, 2014 Share #1815 Posted April 16, 2014 Wasn't there that tunnel down in Bay Ridge that was started but never finished? It would make sense to finish it and connect the to Staten Island that way. But that's probably not going to happen in my lifetime. First, it was the to New Jersey and now this. What's the big fascination with connecting NEW YORK trains to NEW JERSEY? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BM5 via Woodhaven Posted April 16, 2014 Share #1816 Posted April 16, 2014 First, it was the to New Jersey and now this. What's the big fascination with connecting NEW YORK trains to NEW JERSEY? Since when was Staten Island part of New Jersey? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lupojohn Posted April 16, 2014 Share #1817 Posted April 16, 2014 Since when was Staten Island part of New Jersey? My mistake. You get my point, though. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bobtehpanda Posted April 17, 2014 Share #1818 Posted April 17, 2014 (edited) First, it was the to New Jersey and now this. What's the big fascination with connecting NEW YORK trains to NEW JERSEY? They've been talking about linking Staten Island since the days of the Dual Contracts. Tunnel approaches sort of already exist, but the biggest problem is figuring out how you would get additional trains using the 4th Av express tracks through DeKalb. If there was a way to directly link DeKalb's inner express tracks to Montague, it would be perfect as you could have a Staten Island express to Chambers St, but the actual logistics of it would be a bit tricky. Edited April 17, 2014 by bobtehpanda 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
N6 Limited Posted April 17, 2014 Share #1819 Posted April 17, 2014 First, it was the to New Jersey and now this. What's the big fascination with connecting NEW YORK trains to NEW JERSEY? Since when was Staten Island part of New Jersey? My mistake. You get my point, though. This is the NYC metropolitan area, NJ should not be segregated just because it's a different state. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Union Tpke Posted April 17, 2014 Share #1820 Posted April 17, 2014 This is the NYC metropolitan area, NJ should not be segregated just because it's a different state. Exactly, I am working out a fantasy plan with a few lines to NJ, including some IRT lines taking over path. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bobtehpanda Posted April 17, 2014 Share #1821 Posted April 17, 2014 This is the NYC metropolitan area, NJ should not be segregated just because it's a different state. No, but they should be segregated since they provide absolutely nothing to MTA finances. If New Jersey wants the same regional tax that we in the New York section of the metro area pay, then it can get services. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lupojohn Posted April 17, 2014 Share #1822 Posted April 17, 2014 This is the NYC metropolitan area, NJ should not be segregated just because it's a different state. I'm not arguing against that. It just seems ridiculous to me that NYC TRANSIT would extend a line to New Jersey when they have their own system, although I think that to NJ idea is dead, for now. As for the to Staten Island, it is a part of New York that doesn't have subway service, but it would be a long, expensive commute that would need serious debate if the idea was ever taken up by the 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JFK Depot Posted April 18, 2014 Share #1823 Posted April 18, 2014 What if the R went via verrazano bridge to staten island and merged with the SIR (thus requiring the SIR to become a subway) would this be possible? Sent from my SPH-L710 using Tapatalk I wouldn't merge it with SIR... SIR is spec'd differently from Subway hence the name Railway.. Those R44s they have aren't the same R44s that ran on the A for years... Those are totally different But back to this mystery tunnel I've heard about... Since they did start a tunnel to Staten Island it would be logical to finish it and just run the R to SI... Eventually I do think someone in power with the right mind will push for this expansion... The 7 to Jersey makes sense or they could just continue it down the west side to lower Manhattan too... Since they just extended the 7 I don't see them really looking into any further expansions with that line yet... We'll probably see Metro North to Penn Station before we see the 7 extended again 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MHV9218 Posted April 18, 2014 Share #1824 Posted April 18, 2014 No, because i'm not coming back from a bar stoned late at night(not directed at you. Directed at the heavy overnight crowd). Honestly, I never knew there was THAT much service overnight. As for the money issue, I don't want to hear it. If they didn't unnecessarily order new cars or do the Hudson Yards project(very few people use 11th Avenue) or SAS, they'd have money. The is their own worst enemy in regards to their shortage in finances. Again, this is not how funding works. Those are massive Capital Program projects often with partial city or federal money which is required to go to a construction project, not rolling stock. In the same way NYCB gets money for specific numbers of buses to order, this is pre-determined construction money. As for SAS, that is an essential project that cannot happen soon enough, and Hudson Yards was funded in decent part by the city explicitly for that purpose--but also, the point is not who uses 11th Ave now, it's who will use it in ten years when there are huge developments there. Finally, what unnecessary new cars? Also, the Franklin Shuttle is totally tame, not sure what the issue is. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lupojohn Posted April 18, 2014 Share #1825 Posted April 18, 2014 Finally, what unnecessary new cars? Also, the Franklin Shuttle is totally tame, not sure what the issue is. The R179's and R188's. Maybe i'm just not happy that the bullets are no longer part of the train in their correct form, but I like the R32, R42, R46, etc. Maybe I don't know finances as well as I should regarding the , but I do know those cars can be cleaned, upgraded, etc. I know the newer cars have automatic announcements and better seating, but there's no reason to get rid of all of them. As for the Franklin Shuttle, I was on the platform and a guy thought I had an issue with him and carried it much further. When I actually got in the train, a different guy thought I was looking at him(totally f**ked if you know what I mean). His buddy had to step in to calm that down. It's my only ride on there, but it wasn't pleasant and didn't look like the greatest area, anyway. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.