Call for 3 extension to Linden Blvd

[Interested Rider]

If a station was to be built, it would have been done when the line was completed in 1922. From that time up and until the 1950's, that area was all swampland and when you stood on the New Lots Avenue platform, you could see the Boulevard and Linden Houses and straight through to Jamaica Bay. Our landlord used to go there to find wood that he used to heat our building.

Up and until the time that the human zoo with their spray cans thought it was fashionable to vandalize subway cars, cars were stored outside the yards with no problem. Now the MTA (and rightfully so) prefers to keep them in the yards so there is no room for a station.there. As far as any extension to Kennedy Airport, thanks to Krispy Kreme the illustrious paragon of virtue from New Jersey, there is no money in the PA as he took it and used it to rebuild the Pulaski Skyway which should have been rebuilt with State or Federal funds.

For the record AM New York has an article today on how East New York is changing. 

[m7zanr160s]

I'm thinking this is pretty easy; as well as an extension to Flatlands Avenue. Just add new tracks that elevate at the eastern side of the yard over on to Linwood Street and build the station between Stanley Avenue and Wortman Avenue. Then, run the line down to Flatlands Avenue and terminate there. The structure would be elevated just over the buildings so as not to interfere. This way, not much--if any--yard space is lost, while still extending the line by two stations.

[bobtehpanda]

Perhaps that is something that needs to be revisited in the future with the understanding that such needs to be both.  

 

From the FAA's perspective, restricting charges on airport users so that they can't just be milked like a piggy bank for whatever a city feels is notionally airport-related is pretty reasonable. 

[Trainmaster5]

I'm thinking this is pretty easy; as well as an extension to Flatlands Avenue. Just add new tracks that elevate at the eastern side of the yard over on to Linwood Street and build the station between Stanley Avenue and Wortman Avenue. Then, run the line down to Flatlands Avenue and terminate there. The structure would be elevated just over the buildings so as not to interfere. This way, not much--if any--yard space is lost, while still extending the line by two stations.

Two things wrong with this idea, IMO. The chances of any elevated extension of the down to Flatlands Avenue died back in the 1920's. I seriously doubt if any transit planner would propose building any new elevated transit in that area because no one in power would ever agree to it. Community opposition and financial reasons make this idea dead on arrival. The far cheaper method to extend transit down there is already running. It's the B84 bus route which runs from New Lots station down to the very area you think needs more service. It's a whole lot cheaper and more flexible to run surface transit down there. BTW I don't know how familiar you are with the topography down there but as a former resident of Fairfield Towers, the housing development bounded by Cozine and Flatlands Avenues where you want to build, the foundations of the buildings and the water mains have been collapsing because the ground can't support the weight of the structures. This condition has been ongoing since at least 1975 in that development which is why most of us laughed when the company proposed going condo. As someone pointed out in an earlier post the area was built over sand and swamp land. That's a recipe for disaster. Just my observation though. Carry on.

[m7zanr160s]

Two things wrong with this idea, IMO. The chances of any elevated extension of the down to Flatlands Avenue died back in the 1920's. I seriously doubt if any transit planner would propose building any new elevated transit in that area because no one in power would ever agree to it. Community opposition and financial reasons make this idea dead on arrival. The far cheaper method to extend transit down there is already running. It's the B84 bus route which runs from New Lots station down to the very area you think needs more service. It's a whole lot cheaper and more flexible to run surface transit down there. BTW I don't know how familiar you are with the topography down there but as a former resident of Fairfield Towers, the housing development bounded by Cozine and Flatlands Avenues where you want to build, the foundations of the buildings and the water mains have been collapsing because the ground can't support the weight of the structures. This condition has been ongoing since at least 1975 in that development which is why most of us laughed when the company proposed going condo. As someone pointed out in an earlier post the area was built over sand and swamp land. That's a recipe for disaster. Just my observation though. Carry on.

I figured no one would have a problem since Linwood Street is straight industrial. And, I don't think noise would be a factor with elevateds anymore because of modern technology; the JFK Airtrain is a good example of that.

[bobtehpanda]

I figured no one would have a problem since Linwood Street is straight industrial. And, I don't think noise would be a factor with elevateds anymore because of modern technology; the JFK Airtrain is a good example of that.

 

The AirTrain uses a wildly different car class and propulsion technology. In contrast, the subway trains, particularly the NTTs, are some of the loudest trains I've ever used, especially compared to trains in peer systems such as Berlin and Hong Kong.

[trainfan22]

The concrete structure on the line has little to no noise with both 62As and the 188s... just build something similar if they plan to extend an outdoor subway line.

[m7zanr160s]

Yeah, I do think the concrete has a lot to do with sound dampening. Also, the raised edges on the Airtrain structure. There's to much technology for noisy elevateds anymore. On top of that, I think we should go back to them in some places. They don't even have to be these ugly rusting eyesores that people traditional think of them as. And, they can be built a lot quicker than these deep tunnel lines we're doing, now.

[RailRunRob]

Shouldn't the region be focused on expanding core capacity in the CBD? For all of this we should be focusing on Phase 3 of SAS just feel as if there are alot more priorities above this. It was a great idea specially if you use existing infrastructure and minimize the cost that's a no-brainer. What's the gain? Afew thousand versus hundreds of thousands even millions. With all these grandiose ideas it's hardly work. Funding is something of a commodity nowadays you have to choose very wisely

[bobtehpanda]

Yeah, I do think the concrete has a lot to do with sound dampening. Also, the raised edges on the Airtrain structure. There's to much technology for noisy elevateds anymore. On top of that, I think we should go back to them in some places. They don't even have to be these ugly rusting eyesores that people traditional think of them as. And, they can be built a lot quicker than these deep tunnel lines we're doing, now.

 

The issue today is that in very few cases does the situation call for elevated rail. Sure, Queens Blvd and the AirTrain work, but think about how wide Queens Blvd and the Van Wyck are and how close buildings are to the rails. WIth very few exceptions, you don't have a lot of roads that are wide enough and don't already have subway rails or rail right-of-way very close by, in which case it would either duplicate existing services or it would be better to use rail rights-of-way and save money. On top of that you have to find a way to transition out of the subway, which requires property takings. For example, in this case extending the train to Linden would require building additional tracks separate from the yard leads and result in takings from/demolishing the two playgrounds in the neighborhood.

 

Shouldn't the region be focused on expanding core capacity in the CBD? For all of this we should be focusing on Phase 3 of SAS just feel as if there are alot more priorities above this. It was a great idea specially if you use existing infrastructure and minimize the cost that's a no-brainer. What's the gain? Afew thousand versus hundreds of thousands even millions. With all these grandiose ideas it's hardly work. Funding is something of a commodity nowadays you have to choose very wisely

 

Yes and no. We should finish SAS, but that is about it. Nearly all of our transit investment (ESA, WTC Hub, Fulton, South Ferry, 7 Line Extension, SAS) in the past 60 years has been in the core. Once we finish SAS it's not even possible to use all that capacity; the connection to Queens can't be utilized because there is no spare track capacity in Queens, and there won't be a connection to the Bronx or Brooklyn. After SAS, we should freeze any new developments and focus on expanding capacity in the outer boroughs, like a Northern Blvd or Queens Blvd Line, or a Third Avenue Line or a Pelham Pkwy Line, or a Nostrand Avenue or Utica Avenue Line, or a TriboroRX Line.

[RailRunRob]

The issue today is that in very few cases does the situation call for elevated rail. Sure, Queens Blvd and the AirTrain work, but think about how wide Queens Blvd and the Van Wyck are and how close buildings are to the rails. WIth very few exceptions, you don't have a lot of roads that are wide enough and don't already have subway rails or rail right-of-way very close by, in which case it would either duplicate existing services or it would be better to use rail rights-of-way and save money. On top of that you have to find a way to transition out of the subway, which requires property takings. For example, in this case extending the train to Linden would require building additional tracks separate from the yard leads and result in takings from/demolishing the two playgrounds in the neighborhood.

 

 

Yes and no. We should finish SAS, but that is about it. Nearly all of our transit investment (ESA, WTC Hub, Fulton, South Ferry, 7 Line Extension, SAS) in the past 60 years has been in the core. Once we finish SAS it's not even possible to use all that capacity; the connection to Queens can't be utilized because there is no spare track capacity in Queens, and there won't be a connection to the Bronx or Brooklyn. After SAS, we should freeze any new developments and focus on expanding capacity in the outer boroughs, like a Northern Blvd or Queens Blvd Line, or a Third Avenue Line or a Pelham Pkwy Line, or a Nostrand Avenue or Utica Avenue Line, or a TriboroRX Line.

I agree.

[Tokkemon]

The AirTrain uses a wildly different car class and propulsion technology. In contrast, the subway trains, particularly the NTTs, are some of the loudest trains I've ever used, especially compared to trains in peer systems such as Berlin and Hong Kong.

Almost all of that has to do with perfectly circular wheels and the rails themselves.

[m7zanr160s]

The issue today is that in very few cases does the situation call for elevated rail. Sure, Queens Blvd and the AirTrain work, but think about how wide Queens Blvd and the Van Wyck are and how close buildings are to the rails. WIth very few exceptions, you don't have a lot of roads that are wide enough and don't already have subway rails or rail right-of-way very close by, in which case it would either duplicate existing services or it would be better to use rail rights-of-way and save money. On top of that you have to find a way to transition out of the subway, which requires property takings. For example, in this case extending the train to Linden would require building additional tracks separate from the yard leads and result in takings from/demolishing the two playgrounds in the neighborhood.

 

 

Yes and no. We should finish SAS, but that is about it. Nearly all of our transit investment (ESA, WTC Hub, Fulton, South Ferry, 7 Line Extension, SAS) in the past 60 years has been in the core. Once we finish SAS it's not even possible to use all that capacity; the connection to Queens can't be utilized because there is no spare track capacity in Queens, and there won't be a connection to the Bronx or Brooklyn. After SAS, we should freeze any new developments and focus on expanding capacity in the outer boroughs, like a Northern Blvd or Queens Blvd Line, or a Third Avenue Line or a Pelham Pkwy Line, or a Nostrand Avenue or Utica Avenue Line, or a TriboroRX Line.

 

I could've been more specific about my plan. I'm saying add the tracks to the eastern-most tracks in the yard AFTER Linden Boulevard; a 14th and 15th track with a platform so to speak. I don't think anything would need be destroyed, if it were done like that. (I'm looking at it from an overhead Google Maps perspective; also, street view.) This way the yard leads could be used and no homes or parks need be destroyed.

[RailRunRob]

I could've been more specific about my plan. I'm saying add the tracks to the eastern-most tracks in the yard AFTER Linden Boulevard; a 14th and 15th track with a platform so to speak. I don't think anything would need be destroyed, if it were done like that. (I'm looking at it from an overhead Google Maps perspective; also, street view.) This way the yard leads could be used and no homes or parks need be destroyed.

Seems like a active driveway for supplies to the yard on the eastern end and looks kinda tight no? The western most tracks store at least two full trains each what would be a alternative for storage? I don't know im I missing something?

[m7zanr160s]

Seems like a active driveway for supplies to the yard on the eastern end and looks kinda tight no? The western most tracks store at least two full trains each what would be a alternative for storage? I don't know im I missing something?

I think that driveway could be built over, not changing it at all. I don't think it'd be too tight, either. The eastern-most tracks already aim for the street, splitting from the yard leads. So you can imagine them expanding the yard by two tracks on the east side, leaving a gap large enough for an island platform. Then, elevate them high enough so that they can run above the buildings to Flatlands Avenue, leaving more than enough clearance for trucks below.

[bobtehpanda]

Almost all of that has to do with perfectly circular wheels and the rails themselves.

 

I don't know about that. In general interior noise seems to be louder, and then you have sounds from other sources as well; as someone who took the from Jamaica to WTC every day, I've learned to hate the very loud sound that NTTs make in terminals.

[RailRunRob]

I think that driveway could be built over, not changing it at all. I don't think it'd be too tight, either. The eastern-most tracks already aim for the street, splitting from the yard leads. So you can imagine them expanding the yard by two tracks on the east side, leaving a gap large enough for an island platform. Then, elevate them high enough so that they can run above the buildings to Flatlands Avenue, leaving more than enough clearance for trucks below.

Umm.. it's feasible I see what your saying break off extend over Linwood street parallel to the yard and run the 2,000 ft or so to Flatlands. Could work definitely not impossible.

[Wallyhorse]

Yes and no. We should finish SAS, but that is about it. Nearly all of our transit investment (ESA, WTC Hub, Fulton, South Ferry, 7 Line Extension, SAS) in the past 60 years has been in the core. Once we finish SAS it's not even possible to use all that capacity; the connection to Queens can't be utilized because there is no spare track capacity in Queens, and there won't be a connection to the Bronx or Brooklyn. After SAS, we should freeze any new developments and focus on expanding capacity in the outer boroughs, like a Northern Blvd or Queens Blvd Line, or a Third Avenue Line or a Pelham Pkwy Line, or a Nostrand Avenue or Utica Avenue Line, or a TriboroRX Line.

Which is why for SAS, should Phase 4 get done, I would have that include a new Schrermhorn Street tunnel to Brooklyn that would connect it to what currently is the Transit Museum (Court Street gets re-activated as subway) and becomes the local line on Fulton Street, the one place where there likely is such a need (since doing so allows the and to both run express on Fulton at all times and eliminate the merging north of Hoyt-Schermerhon, with that line extended late nights to Lefferts). As Fulton Street is likely going to be the next area built up and eventually more of East New York, by the time this got done it likely would be needed.

[m7zanr160s]

I don't know about that. In general interior noise seems to be louder, and then you have sounds from other sources as well; as someone who took the from Jamaica to WTC every day, I've learned to hate the very loud sound that NTTs make in terminals.

I've noticed that they have severely dampened the air release noise when they terminate, though. I think which stems from complaints in Astoria near the Ditmars station.

[Trainmaster5]

I think that driveway could be built over, not changing it at all. I don't think it'd be too tight, either. The eastern-most tracks already aim for the street, splitting from the yard leads. So you can imagine them expanding the yard by two tracks on the east side, leaving a gap large enough for an island platform. Then, elevate them high enough so that they can run above the buildings to Flatlands Avenue, leaving more than enough clearance for trucks below.

Maybe I'm misunderstanding you. Are you suggesting building this elevated extension over people's residences and property? BTW those 4 easternmost tracks you see splitting from the yard lead on Google maps or in person lead into the inspection barn which runs from Hegeman Avenue to just south of Linden Blvd. The empty space on the map from Linden on the eastern edge does encompass a ramp about 2 tracks wide which leads down to the street at Stanley Avenue.That ramp is used by heavy equipment supply deliveries as well as any type of flammable equipment which can not be stored indoors under any circumstances. You do realize that if a station were to be built at that spot it would be less than five train lengths from New Lots Station itself. Does anyone really think the is so flush with cash that they would entertain such an extension to Stanley Avenue or to Flatlands Avenue? People in that neighborhood have clamored for "hawk" (overnight) bus runs on the B20 and B83 down Pennsylvania Avenue from Broadway Junction since the early '80s and never got it because of "cost". This is with the city councilwoman living right there. It took forever to get the B20 re-routed down to Wortman/Cozine to serve that area because the bus used to travel down Linden Blvd  from Pennsylvania Avenue to the east and never touched anywhere south of Linden. The B83 was shifted over to Van Siclen to serve that sliver of New Lots/Spring Creek. The best we got was first the B6 bus to Ashford and Cozine and finally the B6 to the , station at New Lots. The saying in the neighborhood back then was that Stevie Wonder and Ray Charles could see what the thought about that area even back then. Look who the B6 mainly serves. It's my belief that the threw the neighborhood a bone with the B84 bus route with it's limited hours of operation. See the common denominator in everything I've said? It's always bus service for that area. When the first came out to New Lots the residents couldn't figure why their trains were so crowded in the rush hours. It's only when some of us employees who lived in the neighborhood told the people and the politicians that they were getting 9 car trains instead of the 10 cars that ran on the that change came about. Those Lexington Avenue and trains out of New Lots in the am rush were slated for the trash heap before the powers-that-be were alerted to the plan. It's always about cost with the , that and politics, and compared to Hudson Yards, SAS, or any other needed expansion of rapid transit this idea will never have a patron saint to push for it. Just my opinion though. Carry on.

[m7zanr160s]

Maybe I'm misunderstanding you. Are you suggesting building this elevated extension over people's residences and property? BTW those 4 easternmost tracks you see splitting from the yard lead on Google maps or in person lead into the inspection barn which runs from Hegeman Avenue to just south of Linden Blvd. The empty space on the map from Linden on the eastern edge does encompass a ramp about 2 tracks wide which leads down to the street at Stanley Avenue.That ramp is used by heavy equipment supply deliveries as well as any type of flammable equipment which can not be stored indoors under any circumstances. You do realize that if a station were to be built at that spot it would be less than five train lengths from New Lots Station itself. Does anyone really think the is so flush with cash that they would entertain such an extension to Stanley Avenue or to Flatlands Avenue? People in that neighborhood have clamored for "hawk" (overnight) bus runs on the B20 and B83 down Pennsylvania Avenue from Broadway Junction since the early '80s and never got it because of "cost". This is with the city councilwoman living right there. It took forever to get the B20 re-routed down to Wortman/Cozine to serve that area because the bus used to travel down Linden Blvd  from Pennsylvania Avenue to the east and never touched anywhere south of Linden. The B83 was shifted over to Van Siclen to serve that sliver of New Lots/Spring Creek. The best we got was first the B6 bus to Ashford and Cozine and finally the B6 to the , station at New Lots. The saying in the neighborhood back then was that Stevie Wonder and Ray Charles could see what the thought about that area even back then. Look who the B6 mainly serves. It's my belief that the threw the neighborhood a bone with the B84 bus route with it's limited hours of operation. See the common denominator in everything I've said? It's always bus service for that area. When the first came out to New Lots the residents couldn't figure why their trains were so crowded in the rush hours. It's only when some of us employees who lived in the neighborhood told the people and the politicians that they were getting 9 car trains instead of the 10 cars that ran on the that change came about. Those Lexington Avenue and trains out of New Lots in the am rush were slated for the trash heap before the powers-that-be were alerted to the plan. It's always about cost with the , that and politics, and compared to Hudson Yards, SAS, or any other needed expansion of rapid transit this idea will never have a patron saint to push for it. Just my opinion though. Carry on.

 

Linwood Street from Linden Boulevard to Flatlands Avenue is all industrial. I'm saying, make an el that runs from Stanley Avenue to Flatlands Avenue down Linwood Street, then connect those tracks to Livonia Yard; simple.

 

I like expansion. I think our subway system needs a lot of it. I don't think you should wait for demand before building something. There's lots of new development in the area, so this would make travel more convenient for people. Plus, it would enable more people to reach the new shopping area.

 

Yeah, I know: Money this, money that, but I can't let that stop my imagination. On top of that, I'm proposing this because I don't really think it would be that difficult or cost that much: maybe a $200-$300 million extension (just a guesstimate). An elevated line down a wide, utility-less, industrial street... Just sayin.

[BreeddekalbL]

to the one who suggested reactivating court street where the transit museum is, where would the museum go if the train comes through?

[Fresh Pond]

to the one who suggested reactivating court street where the transit museum is, where would the museum go if the train comes through?

$50 says the "abandoned" half of Nassau St.

[r40s 4501]

it makes no sense to extension the 3 train 2 blocks or 3 block not people just being lazy

[Gotham Bus Co.]

it makes no sense to extension the 3 train 2 blocks or 3 block not people just being lazy

 

A half-mile is not "2 blocks or 3 blocks." Many stations are less than a half-mile from other stations.