Jump to content
Attention: In order to reply to messages, create topics, have access to other features of the community you must sign up for an account.
Sign in to follow this  
Porter

First Post-9/11 WTC Temporary PATH Station (N)(R) Connection?

Recommended Posts

2 hours ago, quadcorder said:

Google Maps doesn't get the NYC Subway at all. Just use Citymapper or Transitapp.

How strange. They’ve also combined the 1, R and W at the #1 Rector St. station. Apple Maps  gets it right though.

  • LMAO! 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Maybe the Google mapmakers are from the future when those two stations will be connected (Cortlandt St, not Rector St).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, Lance said:

Maybe the Google mapmakers are from the future when those two stations will be connected (Cortlandt St, not Rector St).

Both of which would be rather pointless anyway considering that South Ferry—Whitehall has the (1)(R)(W). Maybe if the (9) ever went to Red Hook?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Much like with the connection between World Trade Center and Cortlandt St, there is/was a proposed transfer connection between Cortlandt St (IRT) and the rest of the lines at Park Place-Chambers St as part of the general WTC reconstruction projects.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Lance said:

Much like with the connection between World Trade Center and Cortlandt St, there is/was a proposed transfer connection between Cortlandt St (IRT) and the rest of the lines at Park Place-Chambers St as part of the general WTC reconstruction projects.

The IRT Cortlandt St - BMT Cortlandt St connection seems more simliar to the in-system Dey St transfer - it covers a longer distance and isn't currently planned.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Lance said:

Much like with the connection between World Trade Center and Cortlandt St, there is/was a proposed transfer connection between Cortlandt St (IRT) and the rest of the lines at Park Place-Chambers St as part of the general WTC reconstruction projects.

So, basically like the connection between 63rd and 59th? Not terribly convenient or useful, especially, again, considering South Ferry two stations below. I can't think of a single scenario in which such a connection would see any use. Even the (E)(A)(C)(2)(3) to (R)(W) is only semi-useful, however glad I am that it opened (since the free transfer between the (R)(W) and Fulton Center was scrapped).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Porter said:

So, basically like the connection between 63rd and 59th? Not terribly convenient or useful, especially, again, considering South Ferry two stations below. I can't think of a single scenario in which such a connection would see any use. Even the (E)(A)(C)(2)(3) to (R)(W) is only semi-useful, however glad I am that it opened (since the free transfer between the (R)(W) and Fulton Center was scrapped).

No - there was supposed to be a physical in-system passageway under Dey St, right next to the out-of-system one. It's actually an extremely short walk to the (4)(5). However the (R)(W) now connects to all the Fulton St lines becaues of the WTC connection. (and (J)(Z) at Canal and (4)(5) at Union Sq)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, quadcorder said:

No - there was supposed to be a physical in-system passageway under Dey St, right next to the out-of-system one. It's actually an extremely short walk to the (4)(5). However the (R)(W) now connects to all the Fulton St lines becaues of the WTC connection. (and (J)(Z) at Canal and (4)(5) at Union Sq)

I was referring to the supposedly free Cortlandt (1) connection to the rest of the WTC subway lines, not those of the Fulton Center.

Edited by Porter

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Lance said:

Much like with the connection between World Trade Center and Cortlandt St, there is/was a proposed transfer connection between Cortlandt St (IRT) and the rest of the lines at Park Place-Chambers St as part of the general WTC reconstruction projects.

Where would they actually put it, though? North of the mall?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm wondering this too. Didn't think such a thing was for real. It would be a long passage, wouldn't it?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Eric B said:

I'm wondering this too. Didn't think such a thing was for real. It would be a long passage, wouldn't it?

I’ve been following this project from the start. There never was such a passage seriously proposed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, P3F said:

Where would they actually put it, though? North of the mall?

 

1 hour ago, Eric B said:

I'm wondering this too. Didn't think such a thing was for real. It would be a long passage, wouldn't it?

I have some of the blueprints and, believe me, there's no reasonable way to make a dedicated connection within the fare zone.

2WTC and 4WTC have mechanical/HVAC spaces spanning several stories, so going under or over it won't work. The (1) train platforms end south of 2WTC's footprint and north of 4WTC's footprint, anyway. If you try to go under the tracks to access a potential corridor under Vesey Street to the WTC (E) station, you'll run right into the underground access road of the West Bathtub Vehicular Access, while if you try to do the same under Liberty Street to the Cortlandt (R)(W) station, you'll run right into the service roads of the Vehicular Security Center. Going around the buildings in question directly below street level, aside from the city utility conflicts, would simply be too narrow, given the size of the platforms at the termini (assuming there would be any space beneath the street hugging the buildings in the first place).

If any free connection were established, it would be outside of the fare zone, like the one that 63rd and 59th offer. That would be, obviously, a much cheaper and more timely option. The only other way would be to carve a super narrow, super long, and super meandering passageway for which there most likely isn't enough space to begin with.

The nearby (1)(R)(W) South Ferry/Whitehall Street complex renders such a connection unimportant at best, and if there is a need to connect the (1) to the (A)(C)(E), then I think it would actually be better to build a passageway between their respective Canal Street stations, since it's an IND express stop, yet with no connections.

Edited by Porter

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, Porter said:

I was referring to the supposedly free Cortlandt (1) connection to the rest of the WTC subway lines, not those of the Fulton Center.

Sorry, I had been trying to say 'a connection from (R) to (1) would be at least as difficult as the proposed Dey St connection, and much harder than the new (R) to (E) connection' and then I had to clarify what the Dey St connection was and why the (R) to (E) connection had been chosen instead.

However, unlike Dey St, I don't believe (R) to (1) was ever seriously considered due to nearby transfers that exist.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, quadcorder said:

Sorry, I had been trying to say 'a connection from (R) to (1) would be at least as difficult as the proposed Dey St connection, and much harder than the new (R) to (E) connection' and then I had to clarify what the Dey St connection was and why the (R) to (E) connection had been chosen instead.

However, unlike Dey St, I don't believe (R) to (1) was ever seriously considered due to nearby transfers that exist.

Actually, a free connection between the Fulton and WTC subway complexes wouldn't be too difficult to build at all. You'd need only fence off the northern half of the Dey Street Passageway, which would naturally connect the northern underpass of the Cortlandt Street Station to the fare-zoned lower concourse of the Fulton Center. Really, just a fence would be needed. Making such a connection in light of the new (E)(R)(W) connection, however, would introduce redundancy to the (A)(C)(2)(3) lines, so it wouldn't make sense.

A connection to the (1), however, for reasons I'd mentioned above, would be infeasible, unless it were a free out-of-system transfer. A Canal Street (1)(A)(C)(E) connection would be a smarter solution.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There's a WTC complex map printed on fabric next to 2WTC that strangely lacks (W) bullets, yet has something that no other map has; it shows two downtown access portals on the lower concourse level for the (1) line (the only ones heretofore displayed were the two uptown access portals on the upper concourse level). Can anyone confirm the legitimacy of this? It makes sense, but the lower concourse doors lack the "Future (1) Train" cladding featured on the upper concourse doors. It shouldn't be so difficult to find station blueprints online, yet, it seems to be.

fKHgoQW.png

7QVCDrI.png

It also depicts an open direct connection to the lobby of 3WTC, so I can't imagine that it would be very old, which makes the omission of the (W) even stranger.

Edited by Porter
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, Porter said:

There's a WTC complex map printed on fabric next to 2WTC that strangely lacks (W) bullets, yet has something that no other map has; it shows two downtown access portals on the lower concourse level for the (1) line (the only ones heretofore displayed were the two uptown access portals on the upper concourse level). Can anyone confirm the legitimacy of this? It makes sense, but the lower concourse doors lack the "Future (1) Train" cladding featured on the upper concourse doors. It shouldn't be so difficult to find station blueprints online, yet, it seems to be.

fKHgoQW.png

7QVCDrI.png

It also depicts an open direct connection to the lobby of 3WTC, so I can't imagine that it would be very old, which makes the omission of the (W) even stranger.

Both the depicted locations have shields over current construction. I can't imagine what else the construction would be for.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, quadcorder said:

Both the depicted locations have shields over current construction. I can't imagine what else the construction would be for.

Given that each side has three pairs of double doors, they certainly aren't meant for retail, dining, or service areas. Indeed, such arrangements are almost always reserved for subway entrances or other large pedestrian thoroughfares.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Porter said:

Given that each side has three pairs of double doors, they certainly aren't meant for retail, dining, or service areas. Indeed, such arrangements are almost always reserved for subway entrances or other large pedestrian thoroughfares.

The WTC and Fulton Center concourses are climate controlled, but none of the subway platforms are. That is one of the reasons why openable doors are all over the area.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I got a chance to figure out once and for all what is going on behind those doors on the south side...

gGiBuml.png

D3SlQge.png

UWH8A3A.png

Entrance to Cortlandt St (1)

RESTRICTED ACCESS LIVE SUBWAY TRACKS AND POWER

  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah you can see where the doors would lead to when riding a downtown (1) train through the station (the decorative arch visible from the PATH fare control can be seen from there)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, Around the Horn said:

Yeah you can see where the doors would lead to when riding a downtown (1) train through the station (the decorative arch visible from the PATH fare control can be seen from there)

I can never quite get good video footage while riding the train. I always hope that one gets held up due to traffic at Rector, but alas... I'd really like a tour of the station or at least the layout.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, kosciusko said:

Google maps cannot handle the NYC subway.

[img=https://imgur.com/a/QxvLy]

<blockquote class="imgur-embed-pub" lang="en" data-id="BaqrkdG"><a href="//imgur.com/BaqrkdG">View post on imgur.com</a></blockquote><script async src="//s.imgur.com/min/embed.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

Still getting the hang of this lol

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

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