|
|
| Re: (L) to 72nd Street (1363187) | |
 |
|
| Home > SubChat | |
[ Post a New Response | Return to the Index ]
|
Page 3 of 4 |
||
|
| (1363797) | |
Re: (L) to 72nd Street |
|
|
Posted by Wallyhorse on Sun Aug 23 21:56:37 2015, in response to Re: (L) to New Jersey, posted by Stephen Bauman on Sun Aug 23 14:24:27 2015. Which can be done in the city by doing what I previously suggested by having the (L) operate to 72nd Street-Amsterdam Avenue as follows:Going in a diagonal manner after 8th Avenue, slowly going in a northwest direction until reaching 10th Avenue around 20th Street. 23rd Street would be built as a three-track station to allow for short-turns and if warranted peak-direction express runs. Stops after that would be as follows: 31st-33rd Street (local) 41st Street (Express, Transfer to 7 if that station ever gets built, this one might be the incentive to build the other one) 49th-50th Street (Local) 58th Street-Roosevelt Hospital (Local) 65th Street-Lincoln Center (Local) 72nd Street-Broadway (Three-track terminal with provisions to continue up Amsterdam if warranted, Transfer to 1/2/3 with additional exits at 74th and 75th on Amsterdam Avenue). |
|
|
| (1363809) | |
Re: (L) to 72nd Street |
|
|
Posted by Broadway Lion on Mon Aug 24 07:32:52 2015, in response to Re: (L) to 72nd Street, posted by Wallyhorse on Sun Aug 23 21:56:37 2015.  |
|
|
| (1363810) | |
Re: What's the obsession with making the subway go EVERYWHERE? |
|
|
Posted by Dyre Dan on Mon Aug 24 07:49:46 2015, in response to Re: What's the obsession with making the subway go EVERYWHERE?, posted by ntrainride on Sun Aug 23 18:06:54 2015. It's a "benefit to the entire city" for most people to be unable to get to part of the city without unnecessary expense and hassle? Sounds like specious reasoning to me. |
|
|
(Sponsored) |
iPhone 6 (4.7 Inch) Premium PU Leather Wallet Case - Red w/ Floral Interior - by Notch-It |
|
| (1363815) | |
Re: (L) to New Jersey |
|
|
Posted by Elkeeper on Mon Aug 24 09:31:27 2015, in response to Re: (L) to New Jersey, posted by Joe V on Sun Aug 23 14:16:49 2015. To prevent any bi-state legal problems, why not just build a terminal at/near 14th/8th, so NJ commuters can access the A,C,E and L lines? |
|
|
| (1363823) | |
Re: What's the obsession with making the subway go EVERYWHERE? |
|
|
Posted by NIMBYkiller on Mon Aug 24 11:32:33 2015, in response to Re: What's the obsession with making the subway go EVERYWHERE?, posted by ElectricTraction on Fri Aug 21 18:54:07 2015. It certainly would be a replacement for the 3rd track. If you get 2 tracks on the central, what's the need for the 3rd on the main? It's not like all those people are going to or originating at Hicksville, Westbury, Carle Place, Mineola, or stops west of there. |
|
|
| (1363824) | |
Re: What's the obsession with making the subway go EVERYWHERE? |
|
|
Posted by NIMBYkiller on Mon Aug 24 11:37:47 2015, in response to Re: What's the obsession with making the subway go EVERYWHERE?, posted by Stephen Bauman on Fri Aug 21 11:10:13 2015. This is true, it would certainly be an improvement over the bus/subway connection currently done |
|
|
| (1363826) | |
Re: What's the obsession with making the subway go EVERYWHERE? |
|
|
Posted by NIMBYkiller on Mon Aug 24 11:42:14 2015, in response to Re: What's the obsession with making the subway go EVERYWHERE?, posted by ElectricTraction on Fri Aug 21 19:54:27 2015. And the outter portion is where the help is needed. West of Flushing you have the 7 line and the QB trunk. Also, last I heard they are rebuilding Elmhurst |
|
|
| (1363829) | |
Re: (L) to New Jersey |
|
|
Posted by Olog-hai on Mon Aug 24 12:25:42 2015, in response to Re: (L) to New Jersey, posted by Wallyhorse on Sun Aug 23 21:43:36 2015. Hudson County has a need for subways these days too. Of course, there is zero interest on NJT's part. |
|
|
| (1363833) | |
Re: (L) to 72nd Street |
|
|
Posted by randyo on Mon Aug 24 12:50:07 2015, in response to Re: (L) to 72nd Street, posted by Wallyhorse on Sun Aug 23 21:56:37 2015. I would make the either 31/33 St station or 41 St the 3 tk station for short turns since it would provide the maximum service for those seeking those areas, I don’t really see much of a market for 23 St. |
|
|
| (1363847) | |
Re: What's the obsession with making the subway go EVERYWHERE? |
|
|
Posted by ElectricTraction on Mon Aug 24 17:17:43 2015, in response to Re: What's the obsession with making the subway go EVERYWHERE?, posted by NIMBYkiller on Mon Aug 24 11:32:33 2015. It would make the third track a lot less urgent, but given the potential for growth in ridership, ridership within LI, reverse commuting, electrification further out OB, the Mainline, and Babylon, etc, I think the third track would still be a worthwhile investment. That being said, it would fall to be a similar priority with a laundry list of other ones all over LIRR. |
|
|
| (1363851) | |
Re: (L) to 72nd Street |
|
|
Posted by Broadway Lion on Mon Aug 24 17:30:08 2015, in response to Re: (L) to 72nd Street, posted by randyo on Mon Aug 24 12:50:07 2015. Put a stop there, business will increase.ROAR |
|
|
| (1363866) | |
Re: (L) to 72nd Street |
|
|
Posted by randyo on Mon Aug 24 19:03:30 2015, in response to Re: (L) to 72nd Street, posted by Broadway Lion on Mon Aug 24 17:30:08 2015. Not if there are any commercial interests there to attract riders. |
|
|
| (1363875) | |
Re: (L) to 72nd Street |
|
|
Posted by randyo on Mon Aug 24 21:48:35 2015, in response to Re: (L) to 72nd Street, posted by randyo on Mon Aug 24 19:03:30 2015. TYPO! That should read not if there AREN’T any commercial interests there to attract riders. |
|
|
| (1363880) | |
Re: (L) to New Jersey |
|
|
Posted by WillD on Mon Aug 24 23:50:51 2015, in response to Re: (L) to New Jersey, posted by Joe V on Sun Aug 23 14:19:33 2015. But the #7 is easier, commercially, relatively speaking.Except that it isn't, not by a long shot. How would you tie the tunnel under the Hudson into the #7 extension tail tracks without causing massive surface disruption? At least Amtrak has made some provisions for an additional Hudson Tunnel. The 7 train was never contemplated as running to Secaucus when built and it's going to be very difficult to turn it west. |
|
|
| (1363881) | |
Re: (L) to New Jersey |
|
|
Posted by WillD on Mon Aug 24 23:53:28 2015, in response to Re: (L) to New Jersey, posted by Broadway Lion on Sun Aug 23 12:10:58 2015. I had Professor Popper. He's an outstanding planner, an excellent professor, and you are not even close to his intellectual peer. |
|
|
| (1363884) | |
Re: (L) to 72nd Street |
|
|
Posted by Wallyhorse on Tue Aug 25 00:42:10 2015, in response to Re: (L) to 72nd Street, posted by randyo on Mon Aug 24 12:50:07 2015. Good point. I might then just make all three (23rd, 31-33 and 41st) three-track . |
|
|
| (1363886) | |
Re: (L) to New Jersey |
|
|
Posted by Wallyhorse on Tue Aug 25 00:47:16 2015, in response to Re: (L) to New Jersey, posted by Joe V on Sun Aug 23 14:14:07 2015. That is true.My point is, 14th Street provides transfers from New Jersey to virtually every subway line in Manhattan where except for 7th Avenue it's a short walk plus gives Brooklyn riders in heavily developing areas a one-seat ride between there and New Jersey as well. That also might give incentive to rebuild the previously demolished tracks at Atlantic Avenue so that can be used for short-turns and/or storage, especially if you can travel to East New York on the LIRR and switch there to a New Jersey-bound (L). |
|
|
| (1363888) | |
Re: (L) to 72nd Street |
|
|
Posted by MTA T on Tue Aug 25 03:38:48 2015, in response to Re: (L) to 72nd Street, posted by Wallyhorse on Tue Aug 25 00:42:10 2015. Chill I think 31-33 or 41st would work out. 23rd would probably work out as a 2-track station (unless you want more for the express). |
|
|
| (1363890) | |
Re: (L) to New Jersey |
|
|
Posted by Terrapin Station on Tue Aug 25 07:16:40 2015, in response to Re: (L) to New Jersey, posted by WillD on Mon Aug 24 23:50:51 2015. IAWTP |
|
|
| (1363915) | |
Re: What's the obsession with making the subway go EVERYWHERE? |
|
|
Posted by NIMBYkiller on Tue Aug 25 11:48:53 2015, in response to Re: What's the obsession with making the subway go EVERYWHERE?, posted by ElectricTraction on Mon Aug 24 17:17:43 2015. I think it would solve the problem. MAYBE a 3rd track at Mineola to get expresses around stopped locals, which can be very easily done, but the words meet and LIRR don't go in the same sentence without the word no |
|
|
| (1363972) | |
Re: (L) to New Jersey |
|
|
Posted by Joe V on Tue Aug 25 18:02:18 2015, in response to Re: (L) to New Jersey, posted by WillD on Mon Aug 24 23:50:51 2015. "Commercially" means from a customer demand standpoint, not engineering. You don't understand that part.Now go read the Parsons engineering report. It would branch off within the tail tracks. Why don't you just admit that you hate the idea as it violates your religious conviction of requiring all to take regional rail to a central hub. |
|
|
| (1363973) | |
Re: (L) to New Jersey |
|
|
Posted by Joe V on Tue Aug 25 18:03:30 2015, in response to Re: (L) to New Jersey, posted by WillD on Mon Aug 24 23:53:28 2015. If only planners had a grasp of reality. |
|
|
| (1363985) | |
Re: (L) to New Jersey |
|
|
Posted by Joe V on Tue Aug 25 19:10:20 2015, in response to Re: (L) to New Jersey, posted by WillD on Mon Aug 24 23:50:51 2015. You are a fine one to be complaining about "massive surface disruption".Your convenient amnesia disregarded that fact that Gateway requires Penn Station South and that requires complete demolition of Blocks 780 and part of 805. That includes 80 businesses and 2 churches. Good luck with the hundreds of real estate lawyers who will take Amtrak to the cleaners. Doing so in NY is not as simple a matter as doing so in Phildephia. I don't know what "massive surface disruption" #7 entails, but I'd much rather do it at 24th Street by 11th and 12th Avenue than 32nd Street from 8th Avenue to halfway to 6th. As for only "Amtrak has made some provisions for an additional Hudson Tunnel", that was some Sandy money to build a box tunnel under the LIRR yard, which requires LIRR, at Amtrak expense, to have to deadhead 4 trains (2 to Corona, 2 to Long Beach) out and back each rush hour, and it also demolished a car shop. #7 top Secaucus builds out the 10th Avenue station, and adds access to 5th Avenue and Grand Central stations. Gateway does not touch the NY subway system as it attempts to dump another 80,00 people into the NYPS complex. There is more to building Hudson River tunnels than simply building Hudson River tunnels and playing train. It's a mess don't matter what. Be nice if you out-of-town, intellectual, planners could handle details. |
|
|
| (1363999) | |
Re: (L) to New Jersey |
|
|
Posted by Jackson Park B Train on Tue Aug 25 20:00:34 2015, in response to Re: (L) to New Jersey, posted by Joe V on Tue Aug 25 18:03:30 2015. some do, some don't. The far greater problem is the kleptocrats who controlthe funding. |
|
|
| (1364050) | |
Re: (L) to New Jersey |
|
|
Posted by Joe V on Wed Aug 26 06:48:35 2015, in response to Re: (L) to New Jersey, posted by Jackson Park B Train on Tue Aug 25 20:00:34 2015. The ones who control the project funding are themselves controlled by the contractors and their campaign funders. |
|
|
| (1364070) | |
Re: What's the obsession with making the subway go EVERYWHERE? |
|
|
Posted by GIS Man on Wed Aug 26 10:14:44 2015, in response to What's the obsession with making the subway go EVERYWHERE?, posted by ElectricTraction on Tue Aug 18 20:49:53 2015. Just EVERYWHERE within the NYC limits. Not an unreasonable request. Once that's done they can start thinking about New Jersey, Long Island and Westchester.Bob |
|
|
| (1364090) | |
Re: (L) to New Jersey |
|
|
Posted by Jackson Park B Train on Wed Aug 26 13:45:00 2015, in response to Re: (L) to New Jersey, posted by Joe V on Wed Aug 26 06:48:35 2015. Welcome to the kleptocrat oligarchy! So projects are mostly funded based on who will get the baksheesh. |
|
|
| (1364092) | |
Re: (L) to New Jersey |
|
|
Posted by #5 - Dyre Ave on Wed Aug 26 13:56:09 2015, in response to (L) to New Jersey, posted by Wallyhorse on Sat Aug 22 19:31:31 2015. Other than having longer, wider cars and perhaps an easier path crossing the river from Manhattan to Hudson County, what real advantages would extending the L have over extending the 7? |
|
|
| (1364095) | |
Re: (L) to New Jersey |
|
|
Posted by Jackson Park B Train on Wed Aug 26 14:13:39 2015, in response to Re: (L) to New Jersey, posted by #5 - Dyre Ave on Wed Aug 26 13:56:09 2015. crosstown access to every N-S trunk and a quick way to Brooklyn. |
|
|
| (1364120) | |
Re: (L) to New Jersey |
|
|
Posted by #5 - Dyre Ave on Wed Aug 26 18:22:54 2015, in response to Re: (L) to New Jersey, posted by Jackson Park B Train on Wed Aug 26 14:13:39 2015. I know the 7 doesn't go to Brooklyn, but it also offers crosstown access to every north-south trunk line in Manhattan. |
|
|
| (1364122) | |
Re: (L) to New Jersey |
|
|
Posted by Jackson Park B Train on Wed Aug 26 18:32:33 2015, in response to Re: (L) to New Jersey, posted by #5 - Dyre Ave on Wed Aug 26 18:22:54 2015. Yes, however the L also offers access to both the East and West Village. |
|
|
| (1364149) | |
Re: (L) to New Jersey |
|
|
Posted by Terrapin Station on Thu Aug 27 08:50:15 2015, in response to Re: (L) to New Jersey, posted by Joe V on Tue Aug 25 19:10:20 2015. I think you posted a lot of wrong. |
|
|
| (1364192) | |
Re: (L) to New Jersey |
|
|
Posted by 3-9 on Thu Aug 27 16:56:41 2015, in response to Re: (L) to New Jersey, posted by Joe V on Tue Aug 25 19:10:20 2015. that was some Sandy money to build a box tunnel under the LIRR yard, which requires LIRR, at Amtrak expense, to have to deadhead 4 trains (2 to Corona, 2 to Long Beach) out and back each rush hour, and it also demolished a car shop.Huh, I was wondering what the LIRR had to pay for it, and it doesn't sound too small. The West Side yard was supposed to let the LIRR stop sending trains back out to Long Island for storage. How does the loss of the shop impact LIRR maintenance? |
|
|
| (1364201) | |
Re: (L) to New Jersey |
|
|
Posted by Joe V on Thu Aug 27 17:43:21 2015, in response to Re: (L) to New Jersey, posted by 3-9 on Thu Aug 27 16:56:41 2015. Amtrak has to reimburse LIRR until the yard is restored.Shop work has to be diverted to other shops. No mid-day maintenance of defective trains in Manhattan. |
|
|
| (1364247) | |
Re: (L) to New Jersey |
|
|
Posted by Olog-hai on Fri Aug 28 02:25:20 2015, in response to Re: (L) to New Jersey, posted by Joe V on Sun Aug 23 14:14:07 2015. Really? Hmm. Of course there's a contest between PATH and NJT; the 33rd Street line, and lots of people get off at 14th there still. Never mind the subways traveling between all points in between that connect to all three (PATH downtown as well as NJT).For the record, 14th Street was the original "furthest south" one could go with steam power thanks to NYC government decree, which kept creeping further northward decade by decade until they stopped at 42nd Street. Imagine Grand Central being at Union Square? |
|
|
| (1364260) | |
Re: (L) to New Jersey |
|
|
Posted by Terrapin Station on Fri Aug 28 07:14:42 2015, in response to Re: (L) to New Jersey, posted by Terrapin Station on Thu Aug 27 08:50:15 2015. Bump. |
|
|
| (1364946) | |
Re: (L) to Javits center! |
|
|
Posted by b1bus on Tue Sep 1 21:03:46 2015, in response to (L) to New Jersey, posted by Wallyhorse on Sat Aug 22 19:31:31 2015. Have the L meet the 7. (sarcasm) |
|
|
| (1364947) | |
Re: (L) to Javits center! |
|
|
Posted by The silence on Tue Sep 1 21:07:12 2015, in response to Re: (L) to Javits center!, posted by b1bus on Tue Sep 1 21:03:46 2015. Don't encourage him... |
|
|
| (1364954) | |
Re: (L) to Javits center! |
|
|
Posted by Union Tpke on Tue Sep 1 21:22:05 2015, in response to Re: (L) to Javits center!, posted by b1bus on Tue Sep 1 21:03:46 2015. Instead have the L go to 10th Avenue to meet the 7 for a new Hudson Terminal |
|
|
| (1364995) | |
Re: What's the obsession with making the subway go EVERYWHERE? |
|
|
Posted by Express Rider on Wed Sep 2 03:15:43 2015, in response to Re: What's the obsession with making the subway go EVERYWHERE?, posted by Stephen Bauman on Fri Aug 21 11:10:13 2015. A couple of thoughts - I never understood why local service was not extended to 179th St. If it were, then local trains would serve as a feeder along the entire Queens Line. If there was express service from 179, that would mean only four express stops (five stops with Court Square) to Manhattan, and running time would decrease.If the subway had been/were to be, extended eastward in Queens, perhaps to the proposed Little Neck parkway terminus, as a four track line, local service from LNP would feed the express service, and running time for express trains to Manhattan from LNP would not be that much longer, given that there'd be only one or two express stops between LNP and 179 (I don't remember/know the locations for the planned stations.) If built as a two track line to LNP, local service could still run as an express feeder from 179. Although with a terminus that far east, you'd pick up Nassau commuters from just over the border - greater passenger volume entering at LNP - who would want quick service to Manhattan (express to 179 rathan than all stops to 179). Four tracks to LNP woule be best for efficient service, but we know neither this, nor a two track extension, will never happen. |
|
|
| (1365068) | |
Re: What's the obsession with making the subway go EVERYWHERE? |
|
|
Posted by randyo on Wed Sep 2 15:27:21 2015, in response to Re: What's the obsession with making the subway go EVERYWHERE?, posted by Express Rider on Wed Sep 2 03:15:43 2015. For a time local service in the form of the R Line was extended to 179 St and due to the poor on time performance of the extended line, the R terminal was returned to Ctl. |
|
|
| (1365085) | |
Re: What's the obsession with making the subway go EVERYWHERE? |
|
|
Posted by Union Tpke on Wed Sep 2 16:25:11 2015, in response to Re: What's the obsession with making the subway go EVERYWHERE?, posted by randyo on Wed Sep 2 15:27:21 2015. were there delays at Ctl? I have proposed this to relieve the delays there, and at the switch at 75th, because the F would be able to run express. |
|
|
| (1365132) | |
Re: What's the obsession with making the subway go EVERYWHERE? |
|
|
Posted by Mysterious2train on Wed Sep 2 21:53:00 2015, in response to Re: What's the obsession with making the subway go EVERYWHERE?, posted by Express Rider on Wed Sep 2 03:15:43 2015. The (R) did run to 179 St for a few years. It started in December 1988, when the Archer Av Line opened. The (R) was extended to 179 St all day long to replace rerouted (E) service. It ran local on Hillside Av while the (F) ran express. In September 1990, the (R) was cut back to 71 Av during off-peak hours, only running to 179 St during rush hours, and the (F) ran local between 179 St and 71 Av during these times. In October 1992, rush hour (R) service was cut back to 71 Av, and rush hour (F) service started running local on Hillside Av, basically bringing us to where we are today.I imagine low ridership was at least partially the reason the (R) was cut back. Aside from Union Turnpike and 179 St, ridership beyond 71 Av is fairly low compared to the rest of the Queens Blvd Line. Here's a brochure about the 1990 service change: http://www.subwaynut.com/brochures/1990servicechanges.pdf |
|
|
| (1365140) | |
Re: What's the obsession with making the subway go EVERYWHERE? |
|
|
Posted by Wallyhorse on Wed Sep 2 22:48:17 2015, in response to Re: What's the obsession with making the subway go EVERYWHERE?, posted by Union Tpke on Wed Sep 2 16:25:11 2015. I like that idea of a revival where you can actually have the (G) (M) and (R) ALL run to 179 at all times (maybe late nights cut the (G) back to 71-Continental) and do it where if there is a log jam past Parsons Boulevard going north/east as needed during peak hours moving a local train to the express track and have such skip 169 (usually, this would ONLY be done if there is another train directly behind the one in the station). |
|
|
| (1365157) | |
Re: What's the obsession with making the subway go EVERYWHERE? |
|
|
Posted by Express Rider on Thu Sep 3 01:38:02 2015, in response to Re: What's the obsession with making the subway go EVERYWHERE?, posted by Mysterious2train on Wed Sep 2 21:53:00 2015. THanks for the link. |
|
|
| (1365237) | |
Re: What's the obsession with making the subway go EVERYWHERE? |
|
|
Posted by #4 Sea Beach Fred on Thu Sep 3 18:30:06 2015, in response to Re: What's the obsession with making the subway go EVERYWHERE?, posted by Express Rider on Thu Sep 3 01:38:02 2015. ER---Has there ever been talk of extending the NY Subway under the East River to Staten Island or over the Verrazano? Seems it might be doable if there was enough money in the coffers. I've always asked myself that. |
|
|
| (1365240) | |
Re: What's the obsession with making the subway go EVERYWHERE? |
|
|
Posted by randyo on Thu Sep 3 18:54:13 2015, in response to Re: What's the obsession with making the subway go EVERYWHERE?, posted by #4 Sea Beach Fred on Thu Sep 3 18:30:06 2015. There was talk about extending the NYC subway into Staten Island at least as far back as the 1920s and there were short sections of a Narrows tunnel built from both the Staten Island and Brooklyn sides. There were even semi accessible shafts for the tunnel in Owl’s Head Park in Bay Ridge Bkln, which have recently been filled in. There are also bellmouths S/O 59/4 on the BMT subway for the purpose of connecting to the tunnel. The original SIRT cars were even designed to the dimensions of the BMT steels in the event such a connection was ever built. |
|
|
| (1365246) | |
Re: What's the obsession with making the subway go EVERYWHERE? |
|
|
Posted by Spider-Pig on Thu Sep 3 19:58:51 2015, in response to Re: What's the obsession with making the subway go EVERYWHERE?, posted by #4 Sea Beach Fred on Thu Sep 3 18:30:06 2015. The East River does not adjoin Staten Island. |
|
|
| (1365263) | |
Re: What's the obsession with making the subway go EVERYWHERE? |
|
|
Posted by #4 Sea Beach Fred on Thu Sep 3 23:43:18 2015, in response to Re: What's the obsession with making the subway go EVERYWHERE?, posted by Spider-Pig on Thu Sep 3 19:58:51 2015. Been 61 years sinc since I lived in New York. Is it the Hudson River or New York Bay? |
|
|
| (1365264) | |
Re: What's the obsession with making the subway go EVERYWHERE? |
|
|
Posted by #4 Sea Beach Fred on Thu Sep 3 23:44:15 2015, in response to Re: What's the obsession with making the subway go EVERYWHERE?, posted by randyo on Thu Sep 3 18:54:13 2015. Thanks Randyo. |
|
|
|
Page 3 of 4 |
||
