|
|
| Re: SAS in Brooklyn (via Montauge and Nassau) (554375) | |
 |
|
| Home > SubChat | |
[ Post a New Response | Return to the Index ]
|
Page 20 of 20 |
||
|
| (564288) | |
Re: SAS in Brooklyn (via Montauge and Nassau) |
|
|
Posted by Wallyhorse on Mon Feb 4 01:33:34 2008, in response to Re: SAS in Brooklyn (via Montauge and Nassau), posted by AlM on Sun Feb 3 17:11:20 2008. That probably explains why Chrystie was done as it was in 1966-'67. It would make sense then. |
|
|
| (564289) | |
Re: Nassau Street connection to SAS |
|
|
Posted by Wallyhorse on Mon Feb 4 01:35:39 2008, in response to Re: Fulton Street J/M Station, posted by R143 on Sun Feb 3 15:50:41 2008. Exactly:That is why I would be looking at building the Nassau Connection to the SAS as part of Phase 3 rather than Phase 4. |
|
|
| (564323) | |
Re: SAS Phases 3/4: Water Street/Nassau Street |
|
|
Posted by SMAZ on Mon Feb 4 04:49:17 2008, in response to Re: SAS Phases 3/4: Water Street/Nassau Street, posted by Wallyhorse on Mon Feb 4 01:14:40 2008. That would be very expensive. The purchase and demolition of buildings alone would run into the hundreds of millions. A Park Row alignment wouldn't require such costly and disruptive work. A transfer at Bowery/Grand would satisfy the needs of (J/Z) riders looking to transfer to the SAS. For those taking the (T) from Brooklyn thru Montague/Nassau a transfer to the (J/Z) at Broad or Fulton would work well. |
|
|
(Sponsored) |
iPhone 6 (4.7 Inch) Premium PU Leather Wallet Case - Red w/ Floral Interior - by Notch-It |
|
| (564325) | |
Re: SAS Phase 4: Water Street |
|
|
Posted by SMAZ on Mon Feb 4 04:50:55 2008, in response to Re: SAS Phase 4: Water Street, posted by Wallyhorse on Mon Feb 4 01:20:44 2008. Exactly. |
|
|
| (564580) | |
Re: Southeast Queens Issues |
|
|
Posted by R160 8818 on Mon Feb 4 19:59:09 2008, in response to Re: Southeast Queens Issues, posted by trainsarefun on Sat Feb 2 13:24:31 2008. np. |
|
|
| (564581) | |
Re: Fulton Street J/M Station |
|
|
Posted by R160 8818 on Mon Feb 4 20:02:13 2008, in response to Re: Fulton Street J/M Station, posted by SMAZ on Mon Jan 28 03:09:22 2008. Talk to the Police HQ about it. |
|
|
| (564585) | |
Re: SAS Phase 4: Water Street |
|
|
Posted by R160 8818 on Mon Feb 4 20:07:51 2008, in response to Re: SAS Phase 4: Water Street, posted by SMAZ on Mon Feb 4 04:50:55 2008. Stacked configuration seems more logical, the lower level could be extended to run under Water, so that is a provision.Perhaps the Park Row alignment could untangle the mess north of Chambers Street, but it won't call for a complete track rearrangement. |
|
|
| (564587) | |
Re: SAS Phase 4: Water Street |
|
|
Posted by R160 8818 on Mon Feb 4 20:08:58 2008, in response to Re: SAS Phase 4: Water Street, posted by R143 on Sun Feb 3 15:49:36 2008. They could always rebuild another track... the trackbed is still there. |
|
|
| (564588) | |
Re: SAS via Montague tunnel/Nassau Street |
|
|
Posted by R160 8818 on Mon Feb 4 20:10:14 2008, in response to Re: SAS via Montague tunnel/Nassau Street, posted by R143 on Sun Feb 3 15:56:06 2008. LOLS. It does 'stink' near Brooklyn. |
|
|
| (564589) | |
Re: SAS via Montague tunnel/Nassau Street |
|
|
Posted by R160 8818 on Mon Feb 4 20:12:08 2008, in response to Re: SAS via Montague tunnel/Nassau Street, posted by Wallyhorse on Sun Feb 3 16:13:26 2008. Exactly.The M/V Merger will coincide with Phase 3. M will be redirected uptown and the T will be sent to Brooklyn via Montague. Plus there will be no need to terminate at Houston. |
|
|
| (564592) | |
Re: SAS Phase 4: Water Street |
|
|
Posted by R160 8818 on Mon Feb 4 20:15:23 2008, in response to Re: SAS Phase 4: Water Street, posted by Russ on Sun Feb 3 19:39:30 2008. Terminating trains that never go through the Financial District is a political non-starter, which leads us to...The T will terminate at Houston if the FEIS Phase 3 is completed. Houston is further away from the FD than Chatham is Wall Street. By the way the Bridge lines don't cut through the financial district... Nor does the F. Nor does the V. Etc... |
|
|
| (564735) | |
Re: SAS Phase 4: Water Street |
|
|
Posted by SMAZ on Tue Feb 5 02:29:18 2008, in response to Re: SAS Phase 4: Water Street, posted by R160 8818 on Mon Feb 4 20:07:51 2008. That is precisely the plan. |
|
|
| (564737) | |
Re: SAS Phase 3/4: Water Street/Nassau Street |
|
|
Posted by Wallyhorse on Tue Feb 5 02:47:53 2008, in response to Re: SAS Phase 4: Water Street, posted by R160 8818 on Mon Feb 4 20:15:23 2008. Which is why I would include the Nassau connection in Phase 3, with SAS trains joining the Nassau line at either The Bowery or Canal Street. Doing so would prevent most T trains from having to terminate at Houston for several years while the Water Street branch is being built.As noted, the terminal tracks at Chatam Square as I would do them would include the provision to later make them through tracks to Water Street, with Chatam Square being a four-track line. |
|
|
| (564738) | |
Re: Rebuilding tracks |
|
|
Posted by Wallyhorse on Tue Feb 5 02:52:00 2008, in response to Re: SAS Phase 4: Water Street, posted by R160 8818 on Mon Feb 4 20:08:58 2008. Which is what I have been saying about rebuilding the tracks to the unused portion of the Atlantic Avenue El Station. I believe the trackbeds are still in place where that can be done, as it would allow that station to be a terminal for the L during rush hours, while a new K train replaces it between Rockaway Parkway and Canarsie before going to Broadway Brooklyn and the Nassau Street line for instance. |
|
|
| (564739) | |
Re: SAS via Montague tunnel/Nassau Street |
|
|
Posted by Wallyhorse on Tue Feb 5 02:54:13 2008, in response to Re: SAS via Montague tunnel/Nassau Street, posted by R160 8818 on Mon Feb 4 20:12:08 2008. Exactly:Add the Nassau connection to Phase 3, and that takes care of the issue of having to terminate at Houston while waiting for Phase 4 to be built. |
|
|
| (564740) | |
Re: Fulton Street J/M Station |
|
|
Posted by SMAZ on Tue Feb 5 03:13:56 2008, in response to Re: Fulton Street J/M Station, posted by R160 8818 on Mon Feb 4 20:02:13 2008. I would have to talk to the MTA first. |
|
|
| (565208) | |
Re: Combining Phases 3-4/Nassau Street connection to SAS |
|
|
Posted by Wallyhorse on Wed Feb 6 01:52:57 2008, in response to Re: Fulton Street J/M Station, posted by SMAZ on Tue Feb 5 03:13:56 2008. Yes, you would:I think everyone would realize, however, that your plan would be a good one that would be less costly to do, and likely both cut the cost of Phase 4, or better yet combine Phases 3 & 4, extending Phase 3 to include a Chatam Square terminal for later Bronx and Queens SAS lines (a four track station with provisions so such terminal tracks for the Bronx/Queens SAS can eventually be converted into through tracks for the Seaport and South Ferry/Hanover Square stations should those get built). That said, I still like my idea of the Nassau Connection coming after Houston Street, with the SAS joining the J/Z at The Bowery or Canal Street, allowing the SAS to have access to what is a major transfer point just north of the financial district for many. |
|
|
| (567938) | |
Re: Fulton Street J/M Station |
|
|
Posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Mon Feb 11 21:30:06 2008, in response to Re: Fulton Street J/M Station, posted by R143 on Sun Feb 3 15:53:06 2008. I agree, while Water is a nice thought, Nassau is already there, and has the capacity. |
|
|
| (567949) | |
Re: H Train idea |
|
|
Posted by metropod on Mon Feb 11 21:58:20 2008, in response to Re: H Train idea, posted by SMAZ on Sun Jan 20 13:44:14 2008. some maps i've seen list the HH as having run for a short time between court and B'way Junction. |
|
|
| (568299) | |
Re: Nassau Street connection to SAS |
|
|
Posted by Wallyhorse on Tue Feb 12 12:15:33 2008, in response to Re: Fulton Street J/M Station, posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Mon Feb 11 21:30:06 2008. Exactly:Nassau definitely has the capacity to handle the SAS, especially if it is replacing the M (likely by that point to be combined with the V anyway) along that route. |
|
|
| (568399) | |
Re: Nassau Street connection to SAS |
|
|
Posted by Russ on Tue Feb 12 14:20:22 2008, in response to Re: Nassau Street connection to SAS, posted by Wallyhorse on Tue Feb 12 12:15:33 2008. Nassau definitely has the capacity to handle the SASDefinitely? Proof? Nassau does not have the capacity for 25tph of SAS trains moving into the Financial District, unless it terminates trains north of the district which is horrendous planning. |
|
|
| (568400) | |
Re: Fulton Street J/M Station |
|
|
Posted by Russ on Tue Feb 12 14:22:15 2008, in response to Re: Fulton Street J/M Station, posted by R143 on Sun Feb 3 15:53:06 2008. The Nassau Line is only underused where it is least needed. It lacks the capacity at Fulton and Broad where it is most critical. Also, it merges with the R, which is already using 10tph of Montague St Tunnel capacity. |
|
|
| (568451) | |
Re: H Train idea |
|
|
Posted by GIS Man on Tue Feb 12 15:29:43 2008, in response to Re: H Train idea, posted by metropod on Mon Feb 11 21:58:20 2008. Sure that wasn't from Court to Rockaway Av? The line was open to Rockaway Av. for some years before Broadway-East New York was built. I'm told they had sliding platforms at Ralph and Rockaway for trains on the express tracks. Previous posts on this board have said, however, that nearly all the time it was open, Court St. was served only by an (HH) shuttle to Hoyt-Schermerhorn.Bob |
|
|
| (568543) | |
Re: H Train idea |
|
|
Posted by randyo on Tue Feb 12 19:17:07 2008, in response to Re: H Train idea, posted by Kew Gardens Teleport on Sun Jan 20 16:27:48 2008. Many of the streets in that part of Brooklyn Heights are named for fruits. |
|
|
| (568544) | |
Re: H Train idea |
|
|
Posted by randyo on Tue Feb 12 19:29:16 2008, in response to Re: H Train idea, posted by GIS Man on Tue Feb 12 15:29:43 2008. Although there were some subway maps that showed the HH as running from Court St to Bway/ENY, by the time ENY station opened, the only HH operation which was the shuttle between Court and Hoyt had been discontinued. As originally envisioned, the stub tracks at Court St were to be connected via a new tunnel to the BMT subway at Whitehall St and again from the BMT N/O Cortlandt St to the stub tracks at Hudson Terminal. Later on plans were changed to connecting the Court St tracks to the 2 Av subway. The platforms at Ralph and Rockaway Aves were not sliding platforms but temporary wooden platforms over the local tracks. There was a diamond Xover N/O Rockaway Ave between A-3 and A-4 tracks which was controlled by Utica Av tower. When the line initially opened to ENY, the wooden platforms covering the N/B lcl tracks at ralph and Rockaway were removed first. S/B trains continued to operate via A-3 tk to N/O ENY where they crossed over to A-4 tk and via the diamond Xover between A-2 and A-4 tks N/O ENY operated into either of those 2 tracks into ENY station where they turned back from there. The last time I was at ENY (now renamed Bway Jct) station, the reverse car markers on A-2 an A-4 tracks were still in place. As construction progressed, the S/B temporary platforms were removed and service operated straight into ENY on A-1 track and trains relayed S/O the station until Euclid Av opened in 1948. |
|
|
| (568545) | |
Re: H Train idea |
|
|
Posted by TunnelRat on Tue Feb 12 19:32:00 2008, in response to Re: H Train idea, posted by randyo on Tue Feb 12 19:17:07 2008. And many a fruit walks the streets of brooklyn heights. |
|
|
| (568555) | |
Re: H Train idea |
|
|
Posted by randyo on Tue Feb 12 19:49:09 2008, in response to Re: H Train idea, posted by TunnelRat on Tue Feb 12 19:32:00 2008. And their favorite snack food is kielbasa in the can. |
|
|
| (568562) | |
Re: H Train idea |
|
|
Posted by TunnelRat on Tue Feb 12 19:58:41 2008, in response to Re: H Train idea, posted by randyo on Tue Feb 12 19:49:09 2008. no,its the main course. |
|
|
| (568769) | |
Re: Nassau Street connection to SAS |
|
|
Posted by Wallyhorse on Wed Feb 13 06:15:18 2008, in response to Re: Nassau Street connection to SAS, posted by Russ on Tue Feb 12 14:20:22 2008. So:If necessary, you terminate the J at Chambers (as is already done on weekends), and make the T a through-train to Bay Parkway at all times (with J passengers having a same or cross-platform transfer in that scenario). I also had previously said that if necessary, some T trains can terminate at Houston Street (until Water Street can be built) if that is an issue so the J can continue to Broad. The point is, the T going via Nassau to Bay Parkway can be ready YEARS before the Water Street part of the SAS can be ready. |
|
|
| (568981) | |
Re: SAS to Brooklyn via Water Street |
|
|
Posted by Russ on Wed Feb 13 13:48:51 2008, in response to Re: Nassau Street connection to SAS, posted by Wallyhorse on Wed Feb 13 06:15:18 2008. If necessary, you terminate the J at Chambers (as is already done on weekends), and make the T a through-train to Bay Parkway at all times (with J passengers having a same or cross-platform transfer in that scenario). I also had previously said that if necessary, some T trains can terminate at Houston Street (until Water Street can be built) if that is an issue so the J can continue to Broad.If you terminate the J or SAS/QB, you decrease the utility of those lines to the point where the E train becomes more crowded. The point is, the T going via Nassau to Bay Parkway can be ready YEARS before the Water Street part of the SAS can be ready. Have you ever read the SAS FEIS? If you did, you would know that Phase 4 is scheduled to open a few years after Phase 3, as construction will be concurrent. Building a Nassau St connection and a Water St alignment is basically building two Phase 4s, no matter how you name it or when you start it. The cost to do so will cost billions of dollars extra, and will not accelerate SAS access to the Financial District by any significant amount, if at all. In addition, the cost of the superfluous (to Water St) Nassau St alignment may very well be in the range of the cost of a tunnel to Brooklyn. With the region growing, the R train may need more than the 10tph that it currently uses in the Montague St tunnel. If it operates at 15tph, what happens to the 25tph that the SAS, and the 12+tph of the J train? The best way to Brooklyn is through a new tunnel so that capacity doesn't diminish through the CBDs. Perhaps a 6 track version of the 63rd St tunnel can be built. 2 tracks for the SAS, 2 tracks for the C and E, and 2 tracks for the LIRR. A subway station could be built at Court St and Atlantic Ave. The C and E can merge into the local tracks of Hoyt-Schemerhorn. The SAS can use a new lower level at Hoyt-Scemerhorn, and a new lower level at Pacific St. After Pacific St., perhaps St. George via some alignment. This type of alignment, unlike Nassau St., actually addresses regional problems holistically. Staten Island would have subway access to the Brooklyn CBD, and get to the Financial District faster than the ferry, and to Midtown faster than express busses. There would be no increased incentive created for riders to use the already overcrowded E train. More riders would be diverted from the Lex with a Water St alignment than with a Nassau St alignment. After all, the MTA did choose the Water St alignment after making a very detailed analysis. Nassau St is just not a serious alternative. |
|
|
| (569381) | |
Re: SAS to Brooklyn via Water Street |
|
|
Posted by Wallyhorse on Thu Feb 14 06:16:47 2008, in response to Re: SAS to Brooklyn via Water Street, posted by Russ on Wed Feb 13 13:48:51 2008. Some good points there:If it is feasible to build to tunnel as you suggested with some of the new lower levels as you also suggested, then it would be worth it. It doesn't mean the Nassau Street connection should not also be built, it should be done so if at all possible in addition to allow for greater flexibility and changing conditions (and also allow for example if there is a MAJOR G.O. on the Broadway Line, R and Q trains for instance to be diverted to the 2nd avenue line through Nassau Street and to the Brooklyn via Montague, providing less of a disrutption if that happened). That said, your idea of a new tunnel is similar to mine with a Court Street stop, whether its your new station or using the current Transit Museum Court Street station for that purpose. Having new lower levels at Hoyt-Schermerhorn and Pacific Street before heading on some route to Staten Island is a very good idea as well if it is feasible, perhaps such of a lower level can serve as a super express after Pacific Street via 4th Avenue to 59th Street (island platform with two tracks under the existing tracks at Pacific and 59th), and from there to Staten Island in some manner. That could possibly work as well. |
|
|
| (569543) | |
Re: SAS to Brooklyn via Water Street |
|
|
Posted by Grand concourse on Thu Feb 14 16:48:25 2008, in response to Re: SAS to Brooklyn via Water Street, posted by Wallyhorse on Thu Feb 14 06:16:47 2008. Using the Transit Museum Court Street station would be best. I wonder if it is also possible to connect the City Hall BMT lower level to Court St? |
|
|
| (570884) | |
Re: Connecting City Hall BMT Lower Level to Court Street |
|
|
Posted by Wallyhorse on Sun Feb 17 05:58:39 2008, in response to Re: SAS to Brooklyn via Water Street, posted by Grand concourse on Thu Feb 14 16:48:25 2008. It would be very difficult at best to connect the lower level to Court Street the way that station is set up, plus the fact the main level track ramp down very quickly.Still a good question. |
|
|
| (916443) | |
Re: G Train to be cut back to Court Square permanently |
|
|
Posted by R36 #9346 on Thu Mar 25 10:31:17 2010, in response to Re: G Train to be cut back to Court Square permanently, posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Mon Jan 21 14:43:54 2008. June 28, 2010. |
|
|
| (916445) | |
It has been realized! The M-V Combo! |
|
|
Posted by R36 #9346 on Thu Mar 25 10:31:48 2010, in response to Re: G Train to be cut back to Court Square permanently, posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Mon Jan 21 14:43:54 2008. June 28, 2010. |
|
|
|
Page 20 of 20 |
||
