|
|
| Re: Keeping the system partially open? (1336418) | |||
 |
|||
| Home > SubChat | |||
|
[ Read Responses | Post a New Response | Return to the Index ] |
|
||
|
Re: Keeping the system partially open? |
|
|
Posted by Michael549 on Wed Jan 28 12:13:08 2015, in response to Keeping the system partially open?, posted by rbseabeach on Wed Jan 28 11:02:08 2015. It is entirely possible for the following basic underground only pathways for each of the subway lines:#1 - Running between South Ferry and maybe 168th Street or Dyckman Street (if possible) #2 - Running between 149th Street-Third Avenue or Grand Concourse and Flatbush Avenue-Brooklyn College #3 - Running between 145th Street (or maybe 148th Street-Lenox Terminal) to Utica Avenue, Brooklyn. #4 - 149th Street-Grand Concourse and Utica Avenue, Brooklyn #5 - Running between 149th Street-Third Avenue or Grand Concourse and Flatbush Avenue-Brooklyn College (or Bowling Green) #6 - Running between Hunts Point Avenue and Brooklyn Bridge #7 - Running between Times Square and Hunters Point Avenue (or maybe Queensboro Plaza for a short elevated segment) A - Running between 207th Street and Euclid Avenue B - Bedford Park Blvd or 145th Street to 34th Street/6th Avenue or Second Avenue, or Prospect Park C - 168th Street to Euclid Avenue D - 205th Street to to 34th Street/6th Avenue or Second Avenue, or 36th Street/4th Avenue. E - Jamaica Center and WTC F - 179th Street and Church Avenue G - Court Square and Church Avenue J - Chambers Street (or Broad Street) and Essex Street L - 14th Street/8th Avenue to Broadway Junction M - Forest Hills and Second Avenue or Essex Street N - 57th Street or 60th Street/Lexington Avenue and 59th Street/4th Avenue Q - 57th Street to Prospect Park R - Forest Hills and 95th Street S - Times Square To Grand Central Station (no Franklin Shuttle) --------- For the folks who repeatedly, and I do mean repeatedly were saying that the "underground secions" of the subways could have been kept running. Yes, that is true, but think about the sections of the city that would not have had service: Major portions of the west Bronx, and most of the east and north Hronx would not have had service, especially with the buses not running. Major portions of Queens, such as Flushing, Astoria, Rockaways, Ozone Park, Richmond would not have had service, especially with the buses not running. Major portions of Brooklyn, such as Coney Island, Gravesend, Brighton Beach, Bushwick, Williamsburg, Brownsville, would not have had service, especially with the buses not running. All of Staten Island would not have had service since the SIRT is entirely on the ground or above the ground! With the buses not running all of the eastern, southern, western, northern and middle island sections of Staten Island would have been without transit service. The restrictions on the Staten Island Ferry service, as well as the restrictions on bridge travel would have made Staten Island almost impossible to get to, from, or around. The only borough that would have really retained something resembling regular subway transit from an "underground only" weather-impacted subway system would have been Manhattan, even if given the fact that the buses were not running. Yes, there would be places in Manhattan that would be difficult to get to easily with the bus system running. The folks who repeatedly, and I do mean repeatedly kept saying that only the "underground sections" should be kept running it seems never really looked at the sections of the city that would be out of service under such a scheme. Now to the argument that the subways have run before in storms with both underground, on-the-ground and elevated segments in operation, and that problems were dealt with where needed. That street closings due to snow did affect some bus routes in the past, and that those were dealt with as needed. Yes - those folks have a good point - that the transit systems are more resilient than some times believed. The argument for "keeping underground only open" and the "subway transit (underground & elevated) is more resilient and up to the task" are really too different arguments. Another argument that is not often thought about is the famous - "hindsight is wonderful". Mike |
|
|
|