|
|
| Re: SAS Phase 4: Water Street (554375) | |
 |
|
| Home > SubChat | |
[ Post a New Response | Return to the Index ]
|
Page 17 of 20 |
||
|
| (561121) | |
Re: SAS Phase 4: Water Street |
|
|
Posted by Wallyhorse on Tue Jan 29 12:40:35 2008, in response to Re: SAS Phase 4: Water Street, posted by Edwards! on Tue Jan 29 11:35:12 2008. And that is why you need to educate people on these factors, mainly that a cut-and-cover results in cheaper costs and less property having to be taken. |
|
|
| (561130) | |
Re: Future phases of SAS |
|
|
Posted by R160 8818 on Tue Jan 29 13:07:51 2008, in response to Re: Future phases of SAS, posted by Wallyhorse on Tue Jan 29 07:52:50 2008. Yes!Plus it actually goes through the Financial District, while Phase 4 only skirts past it. There are some businesses on Water Street, don't get me wrong, but not as much as the ones near Broadway. And besides the connection there isn't much to be done in terms of digging a tunnel. That will save the MTA some millions. So while this is implemented, the MTA could just save the money until they have more money or a demand for mass transit along the Water Street corridor. Think of the BMT 60th Street Tunnel and the IND Queens Blvd Line, that connection allowed the Broadway trains to run through Sunnyside and Elmhurst and Forest Hills without the requirement of a new tunnel. |
|
|
| (561134) | |
Re: G Train to be cut back to Court Square permanently |
|
|
Posted by Andrew Kirschner on Tue Jan 29 13:12:01 2008, in response to Re: G Train to be cut back to Court Square permanently, posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Wed Jan 16 09:51:03 2008. Well, I guess they are used to that. G riders are shafted on the other end of the line too one stop short of a key transfer. Does anyone else see Smith and 9th to be a ludicrous location for a terminal? Yet it's been like that since IND days.I've always thought that if NYCT/MTA wants to seal the deal, they couold start terminating the G at Fulton/Lafeyette and institute a Metrocard transfer to the C there. The only problem is that the stations are too close together. It would probably have to lead to a "temporary" construction detour to take the walk a few blocks out of the way. |
|
|
(Sponsored) |
iPhone 6 (4.7 Inch) Premium PU Leather Wallet Case - Red w/ Floral Interior - by Notch-It |
|
| (561136) | |
Re: SAS: Water/Nassau Street Branches |
|
|
Posted by R160 8818 on Tue Jan 29 13:13:17 2008, in response to SAS: Water/Nassau Street Branches, posted by Wallyhorse on Tue Jan 29 12:20:31 2008. There isn't that much of a demand for mass transit along the Water Street corridor. And even if it is built, Phase 4 will NOT offer as much transfers as the line through Nassau.In fact, advancing into the Bronx will be even more crucial after Phase 3A and 3B (the connection to the Montague via Nassau). Perhaps it could run on an el structure above 3rd Ave in the Bronx. |
|
|
| (561141) | |
Re: SAS via Montague tunnel/Nassau Street |
|
|
Posted by Wado MP73 on Tue Jan 29 13:20:38 2008, in response to Re: SAS via Montague tunnel/Nassau Street, posted by Michael549 on Tue Jan 29 12:29:06 2008. Calm down Mike. You're mixing up Russ' posts and mine... |
|
|
| (561160) | |
Re: SAS: Water vs. Nassau Street and M-V Combo |
|
|
Posted by Edwards! on Tue Jan 29 13:45:30 2008, in response to Re: SAS: Water vs. Nassau Street and M-V Combo, posted by Wallyhorse on Tue Jan 29 12:35:00 2008. Right....The V and an Eastern Division line would replace the 6th avenue F service. |
|
|
| (561161) | |
Re: SAS Phase 4: Water Street |
|
|
Posted by R160 8818 on Tue Jan 29 13:46:14 2008, in response to Re: SAS Phase 4: Water Street, posted by Wado MP73 on Thu Jan 24 18:18:20 2008. where was that? |
|
|
| (561164) | |
Re: SAS via Montague tunnel/Nassau Street |
|
|
Posted by Edwards! on Tue Jan 29 13:49:40 2008, in response to Re: SAS via Montague tunnel/Nassau Street, posted by Michael549 on Tue Jan 29 12:29:06 2008. Sweet..Text book debating skills. |
|
|
| (561171) | |
Re: G Train to be cut back to Court Square permanently |
|
|
Posted by Pelham R62A on Tue Jan 29 14:04:18 2008, in response to Re: G Train to be cut back to Court Square permanently, posted by Terrapin Station on Wed Jan 16 09:58:35 2008. Would you happen to know whether the V would be extended to Church after the viaduct work is complete and F express service is implemented? |
|
|
| (561177) | |
Re: G Train to be cut back to Court Square permanently |
|
|
Posted by Terrapin Station on Tue Jan 29 14:21:34 2008, in response to Re: G Train to be cut back to Court Square permanently, posted by Pelham R62A on Tue Jan 29 14:04:18 2008. AFAIK, NYCT has not publicly announced any post-construction changes to the (V) or (F). However, Train Dude, a member of NYCT management, did post this thread about extending the (V) to Euclid Ave. |
|
|
| (561180) | |
Re: Future phases of SAS |
|
|
Posted by Wallyhorse on Tue Jan 29 14:23:07 2008, in response to Re: Future phases of SAS, posted by R160 8818 on Tue Jan 29 13:07:51 2008. Absolutely:That is why a Nassau Street connection (either as an add-on to Phase 3 following Houston Street or as also suggested as the first part of Phase 4 after Chatam Square) is very important. The Nassau Street connection would have Phase 3 go through the heart of the financial district, and also if it connects prior to Canal Street going through what is both a major hub there AND for those that work in the Manhattan courts and DA's Office that live on the east side be an easy walk to their jobs. |
|
|
| (561184) | |
Re: SAS via Montague tunnel/Nassau Street |
|
|
Posted by Wallyhorse on Tue Jan 29 14:26:42 2008, in response to Re: SAS via Montague tunnel/Nassau Street, posted by Wado MP73 on Tue Jan 29 10:19:35 2008. It should be educated to them that they would only lose that space for a few months, and that space would be rebuilt once the cut-and-cover work is complete. That is something I would put up with for a few months if it meant a more efficient job and not having to go deep downstairs to get a train there once its ready. |
|
|
| (561185) | |
Re: Fulton Street J/M Station |
|
|
Posted by Wallyhorse on Tue Jan 29 14:28:53 2008, in response to Re: Fulton Street J/M Station, posted by Wado MP73 on Tue Jan 29 10:31:03 2008. That's why my first option would be to have the Nassau Connection be added to the end of Phase 3, which would have the SAS join the Nassau Street line before either The Bowery or Canal Street. |
|
|
| (561202) | |
Re: SAS: Water/Nassau Street Branches |
|
|
Posted by Wado MP73 on Tue Jan 29 14:46:52 2008, in response to Re: SAS: Water/Nassau Street Branches, posted by R160 8818 on Tue Jan 29 13:13:17 2008. There isn't that much of a demand for mass transit along the Water Street corridor.A lot of people, including those who wants a Nassau connection first will disagree. |
|
|
| (561204) | |
Re: SAS: Water/Nassau Street Branches |
|
|
Posted by Russ on Tue Jan 29 14:49:36 2008, in response to Re: SAS: Water/Nassau Street Branches, posted by R160 8818 on Tue Jan 29 13:13:17 2008. There isn't that much of a demand for mass transit along the Water Street corridor.Have you ever been on Water St.? The Seaport draws an enormous number of peoploe. Below Fulton, it is loaded with 50 story buildings. |
|
|
| (561258) | |
Re: SAS Phase 4: Water Street/Nassau Street |
|
|
Posted by Russ on Tue Jan 29 17:44:14 2008, in response to Re: SAS Phase 4: Water Street/Nassau Street, posted by SMAZ on Tue Jan 29 01:05:43 2008. I don't think that all four tracks need to be usedAll 4 tracks need to be used. J+T+SAS/QB > 30tph. That means that one of these three routes has to terminate at Chambers, which is north of the Financial District. The R uses the Montague St Tunnel. That's 10tph, so one of the SAS routes would have to terminate at Broad St. This is one of many reasons why Nassau St is an inferior option. Creating a permanent restriction on capacity is poor long range planning. |
|
|
| (561263) | |
Re: SAS Phase 4: Water Street |
|
|
Posted by Russ on Tue Jan 29 17:54:18 2008, in response to Re: SAS Phase 4: Water Street/Nassau Street, posted by Wallyhorse on Tue Jan 29 12:37:54 2008. Terminating the J at Chambers will cause more Jamaica originating riders to take the E. Bad move. |
|
|
| (561269) | |
Re: SAS via Montague tunnel/Nassau Street |
|
|
Posted by Russ on Tue Jan 29 18:01:24 2008, in response to Re: SAS via Montague tunnel/Nassau Street, posted by Wado MP73 on Tue Jan 29 13:20:38 2008. Yeah, he seems to have the same problem separating what we wrote with separating the two distinct CBDs in Manhattan |
|
|
| (561272) | |
Re: Fulton Street J/M Station |
|
|
Posted by Russ on Tue Jan 29 18:08:30 2008, in response to Re: Fulton Street J/M Station, posted by trainsarefun on Tue Jan 29 11:36:42 2008. If they did eventually build a tunnel between Lower Manhattan and LIRR's FBA terminal, preferably it should be a double decker arrangement, with LIRR on one level and NYCT on another.That would be the way to go. I'd like to see such a tunnel have at least 6 tracks. 2 for the LIRR, 2 for the SAS, and 2 for the C and E. |
|
|
| (561291) | |
Re: SAS via Montague tunnel/Nassau Street |
|
|
Posted by Russ on Tue Jan 29 19:14:39 2008, in response to Re: SAS via Montague tunnel/Nassau Street, posted by Michael549 on Tue Jan 29 12:29:06 2008. Do you realize that you have combined someone else's posts with mine, and that you are flaming me for posts that I did not make?Anyway, you still have not provided any official citation of who considers all of manhattan south of 59th St to be a single CBD. The New York City Economic Development Corporation even has a page for the City's CBDs outside of Midtown here. Guess what it explicitly mentions? The Lower Manhattan CBD. Turns out I was wrong about the Lower Manhattan's boundries. The Municipal Building is inside it. I was not, however wrong about the CBDs being separate, nor was I wrong about the foolishness of building subway lines to Lower Manhattan that do not stop in the Financial District. |
|
|
| (561330) | |
Re: SAS Phase 4: Water Street/Nassau Street |
|
|
Posted by Wado MP73 on Tue Jan 29 20:59:14 2008, in response to Re: SAS Phase 4: Water Street/Nassau Street, posted by SMAZ on Tue Jan 29 01:05:43 2008. It's about a new trunk line (the SAS) that will relieve the Lex not just from the Bronx and Manhattan but from Brooklyn as well.Hello? There are four tunnels linking Brooklyn to Lower Manhattan plus a rush hour only branch. There are four bridge tracks and a two-track tunnel that bypass Lower Manhattan for Midtown bound people, two thirds of these tracks will have a transfer to the SAS. And how many lines/tracks do we have from the UES/Midtown East to Lower Manhattan? Just one line, four tracks shrinking to two. |
|
|
| (561343) | |
Re: SAS via Montague tunnel/Nassau Street |
|
|
Posted by Terrapin Station on Tue Jan 29 21:12:56 2008, in response to Re: SAS via Montague tunnel/Nassau Street, posted by Russ on Tue Jan 29 18:01:24 2008. lol |
|
|
| (561345) | |
Re: SAS via Montague tunnel/Nassau Street |
|
|
Posted by Terrapin Station on Tue Jan 29 21:22:17 2008, in response to Re: SAS via Montague tunnel/Nassau Street, posted by Russ on Tue Jan 29 19:14:39 2008. NYMTC considers the CBD to be everything below 60th. |
|
|
| (561348) | |
Re: SAS via Montague tunnel/Nassau Street |
|
|
Posted by Russ on Tue Jan 29 21:25:58 2008, in response to Re: SAS via Montague tunnel/Nassau Street, posted by Terrapin Station on Tue Jan 29 21:22:17 2008. Yeah, the Manhattan Institute uses the single CBD definition too. |
|
|
| (561401) | |
Re: SAS/four tracks/to Brooklyn and Queens |
|
|
Posted by Wallyhorse on Wed Jan 30 01:45:14 2008, in response to Re: SAS/four tracks, posted by R160 8818 on Mon Jan 28 20:46:42 2008. Some very interesting ideas for a Brooklyn run:That said, the 55th street stop is actually 53rd-55th so that people can transfer from there to the 6/E/V trains. I don't think that stop would change, but I would look at making that stop 50th-53rd and then adding a local stop at 57th-60th to allow for transfers to the 4/5/6/N/R/W and an out-of-system transfer to the Q/F at 63rd/Lex. The express stops I would do with 14th Street as the start point would be there, then 42nd, 72nd, 86th and 116th, with the express tracks rising before and going down after 42nd and 72nd (or if 72nd is not possible because of exsiting alingments, then 86th), also doing so where all tracks would at 72nd (whether on one level or two at that point) be able to have a branch break away for a new tunnel that would run through 79th street, stopping at York-1st Avenues there before heading to Roosevely Island and then Queens as a super express that would help alieviate the overcrowding problem on the Queens Blvd. line. As for Brooklyn, the best bet would be to have any SAS trains access the Nassau Street line after Houston as noted before. |
|
|
| (561405) | |
Re: SAS Phase 4: Water Street |
|
|
Posted by Wallyhorse on Wed Jan 30 01:52:24 2008, in response to Re: SAS Phase 4: Water Street, posted by Russ on Tue Jan 29 17:54:18 2008. True:That is why I would continue to have the J ideally terminate at Broad and have the SAS go to Brooklyn. Chambers would only be if absolutely necessary. The big thing is 24/7 access to Brooklyn via Nassau and Montauge for those on the SAS (and likewise for those in Brooklyn heading to the upper east side) by having the connection. |
|
|
| (561411) | |
Re: SAS Phase 4: Water Street/Nassau Street |
|
|
Posted by SMAZ on Wed Jan 30 02:31:35 2008, in response to Re: SAS Phase 4: Water Street/Nassau Street, posted by Russ on Tue Jan 29 17:44:14 2008. Just the (J/Z) and a split (T) into Nassau. That about 20-24 TPH. The Queens SAS and the future Bronx SAS (which would split from the north bound (T) after 116th and terminate in the 125/2 miniyard and one day continue to the Bronx) would terminate at a Chatham Sq Lower Level. They could one day be extended down Water St to Hanover Sq. The (M) can merge with the (V). I'll make an example below. For the sake of sanity I'll refer to the other SAS service as the (U) and the Queens service as the (Y).Upper SAS: (Q) 125/Lex-CI 10-12 TPH (T) 125/Lex-Bay Pkwy via Nassau/Montauge 10-12 TPH (U) 116/2-Chatham Sq LL(and one day to Bronx)8-10 TPH Total trains on 63rd-125 SAS segment: about 30 TPH Lower SAS (T) described above (U) described above (Y) somewhere in Queens to Chatham Sq LL 10 TPH Total trains on 63rd-Chatham Sq segment: about 28-30 TPH at Chatham Sq the (U) and (Y) would descend to a Lower Level and terminate there with provisions to extend down Water St. That would be a terminal capable of handling 18-20 TPH. The (T) would stop at an Upper Level there and then join the (J/Z) under Nassau St. Nassau St (J/Z) as is 12 TPH (T) described above 10-12 TPH Total Nassau St: 22-24 TPH The (M) merges with the (V) This isn't some wild unrealistic fantasy plan. It's what I think is the best possible plan for a 4-boro two-track Second Av Subway. I hope that some MTA engineers are reading this right now. |
|
|
| (561416) | |
Re: SAS Phase 4: Water Street/Nassau Street |
|
|
Posted by SMAZ on Wed Jan 30 02:40:39 2008, in response to Re: SAS Phase 4: Water Street/Nassau Street, posted by Wado MP73 on Tue Jan 29 20:59:14 2008. Good example. Those two Lex tracks(the 4/5) then merge with two more IRT tracks in Brooklyn (the 2/3) for four total tracks. One doesn't have to ride the (2/3) all the way to Manhattan to transfer to the Lex. The (T) to Brooklyn in place of the (M) would give many of these riders a transfer to the SAS while still in Brooklyn. Somehow it seems that the MTA thinks that only UESers and MNRR riders are worthy of relief from crowded subways. |
|
|
| (561418) | |
Re: SAS in Brooklyn (via Montauge and Nassau) |
|
|
Posted by SMAZ on Wed Jan 30 02:45:55 2008, in response to Re: SAS in Brooklyn (via Montauge and Nassau), posted by Wallyhorse on Tue Jan 29 07:27:41 2008. In addition, J riders at Essex (and Chambers who don't want to take the 4/5/6) could switch to the SAS at either Fulton or Broad on the SAME PLATFORM for the SAS to Brooklyn if the SAS doesn't join the Nassau Street Line before Chambers, Canal or The Bowery if they don't want to use the 4/5 or go via the Bridge from Canal Street to Brooklyn.I would build a free transfer between Grand St and The Bowery for the (J/Z) crowd. |
|
|
| (561419) | |
Re: Fulton Street J/M Station |
|
|
Posted by SMAZ on Wed Jan 30 02:51:37 2008, in response to Re: Fulton Street J/M Station, posted by Wado MP73 on Tue Jan 29 10:31:03 2008. I would build it under Park Row. The (T) would double stack below Chatham Sq and plug directly into the northbound or southbound (J/Z) stack on Nassau St. No fly-over or fly-under needed. No burial grounds in the way. No demolition of existing buildings. It's the cheapest connection imaginable. |
|
|
| (561420) | |
Re: Fulton Street J/M Station |
|
|
Posted by SMAZ on Wed Jan 30 02:55:17 2008, in response to Re: Fulton Street J/M Station, posted by Edwards! on Tue Jan 29 11:21:54 2008. I think the Water St Line should be built eventually anyway but I would like to see Brooklyn have at least some SAS service before that otherwise these nice MTA tunnel plans will into the same graveyard where the IND Second System plans rest. |
|
|
| (561421) | |
Re: SAS via Montague tunnel/Nassau Street |
|
|
Posted by SMAZ on Wed Jan 30 03:04:16 2008, in response to Re: SAS via Montague tunnel/Nassau Street, posted by Wado MP73 on Tue Jan 29 10:19:35 2008. Battery Park is kinda special to the whole city though. They must promise Chinatown residents that after a closure of one year max, the park will be better then before and they must then keep that promise. Have the community bring input on how they would like to see the park improved. Then make it happen. |
|
|
| (561424) | |
Re: SAS: Water vs. Nassau Street and M-V Combo |
|
|
Posted by SMAZ on Wed Jan 30 03:24:14 2008, in response to Re: SAS: Water vs. Nassau Street and M-V Combo, posted by Edwards! on Tue Jan 29 11:49:13 2008. The glaring problem here is that there wont be a SOUTH FERRY STATION,even though the line tail tracks will end under the FERRY TERMINAL area,under the Upper NY Bay..What is scandalous is that they aren't building a SAS shell station at South Ferry in concurrence with the (1) Line construction there. I guess the MTA figured that 9/11 money would have been better spent on a Glass Egg. |
|
|
| (561425) | |
Re: SAS: Water vs. Nassau Street and M-V Combo |
|
|
Posted by Wallyhorse on Wed Jan 30 03:33:19 2008, in response to Re: SAS: Water vs. Nassau Street and M-V Combo, posted by SMAZ on Wed Jan 30 03:24:14 2008. That I agree on:I would build such a station there for the SAS with the 1, setting up for perhaps a double-decker tunnel that would have both the 1 and the SAS eventually go to Staten Island. |
|
|
| (561426) | |
Re: More uses for Chrystie St Cut Re: SAS: Water vs. Nassau Street and M-V Combo |
|
|
Posted by SMAZ on Wed Jan 30 03:35:05 2008, in response to Re: More uses for Chrystie St Cut Re: SAS: Water vs. Nassau Street and M-V Combo, posted by Wallyhorse on Tue Jan 29 12:31:15 2008. I once saw a map for the "Plan for Action" that showed just that. They had the (B) train going down Nassau St and the SAS train going to the West End Line via Manny B after Grand St. The (D) went to the Brighton via Bridge. |
|
|
| (561427) | |
Re: SAS Phase 4: Water Street/Nassau Street |
|
|
Posted by Wallyhorse on Wed Jan 30 03:42:12 2008, in response to Re: SAS Phase 4: Water Street/Nassau Street, posted by SMAZ on Wed Jan 30 02:31:35 2008. And again, that is along the lines of what I was thinking:The J would still most likely go to Broad Street, the M would not be an issue since it would be merged with the V (or C train) while the T train (SAS) would be replacing the M to Brooklyn on a full-time basis. The other part of the SAS, a Bronx portion that would likely be run on the route of the old Bronx 3rd Avenue El (either as a rebuilt El or a new subway) would be another SAS line (the P, U or Y train?) that would run the Water Street segment to The Bronx (with an additional station in upper Manhattan on 125th/2nd before doing heading into The Bronx). |
|
|
| (561431) | |
Re: Future phases of SAS |
|
|
Posted by SMAZ on Wed Jan 30 03:45:53 2008, in response to Re: Future phases of SAS, posted by R160 8818 on Tue Jan 29 13:07:51 2008. I'm glad that there are sane people who can see this too and your example of the (R) connection to the QB is a good one. It may be extremely difficult to connect it from Houston to The Bowery but Edwards! said that a tunnel is already there for that very purpose. I wonder how that would work since we are talking some major cut-and-cover work. That's why I've concluded that connecting it into the Nassau stacks via Park Row would be the cheapest and easiest while also building a free transfer from Grand to The Bowery. I also mentioned that only a split (T) would fit there with the (J/Z). The rest of the SAS trains must terminate elsewhere. |
|
|
| (561433) | |
Re: SAS Phase 4: Water Street/Nassau Street/Brooklyn Access |
|
|
Posted by Wallyhorse on Wed Jan 30 03:52:10 2008, in response to Re: SAS Phase 4: Water Street/Nassau Street, posted by SMAZ on Wed Jan 30 02:40:39 2008. Exactly:The T replacing the M in Brooklyn would also be a 24/7 line in all likelyhood, giving Brooklyn riders full-time access to the Nassau Street stations as well as the east side without having to change to the 4/5 to do so. As it would be replacing the M, it would give riders on the West End (from Bay Parkway) as well as from 36th street-northbound access to the SAS as a one-seat ride. |
|
|
| (561436) | |
Re: SAS via Montague tunnel/Nassau Street |
|
|
Posted by Wallyhorse on Wed Jan 30 03:55:49 2008, in response to Re: SAS via Montague tunnel/Nassau Street, posted by SMAZ on Wed Jan 30 03:04:16 2008. Exactly:These are people that need to be educated on why having the park torn up to build the "Shallow Chrystie" option will work out better for everyone in the long run, including a much better park than previously there. |
|
|
| (561458) | |
Re: SAS Phase 4: Water Street/Nassau Street |
|
|
Posted by SMAZ on Wed Jan 30 05:38:23 2008, in response to Re: SAS Phase 4: Water Street/Nassau Street, posted by Wallyhorse on Wed Jan 30 03:42:12 2008. That's exactly my thinking. |
|
|
| (561469) | |
Re: G Train to be cut back to Court Square permanently |
|
|
Posted by Railman718 on Wed Jan 30 07:00:30 2008, in response to Re: G Train to be cut back to Court Square permanently, posted by Pelham R62A on Tue Jan 29 14:04:18 2008. He wouldnt know the answer to that question... |
|
|
| (561474) | |
Re: G Train to be cut back to Court Square permanently |
|
|
Posted by Terrapin Station on Wed Jan 30 07:21:24 2008, in response to Re: G Train to be cut back to Court Square permanently, posted by Railman718 on Wed Jan 30 07:00:30 2008. Why wouldn't I? |
|
|
| (561478) | |
Re: G Train to be cut back to Court Square permanently |
|
|
Posted by Railman718 on Wed Jan 30 07:27:12 2008, in response to Re: G Train to be cut back to Court Square permanently, posted by Terrapin Station on Wed Jan 30 07:21:24 2008. Well Do you? |
|
|
| (561481) | |
Re: G Train to be cut back to Court Square permanently |
|
|
Posted by Terrapin Station on Wed Jan 30 07:29:18 2008, in response to Re: G Train to be cut back to Court Square permanently, posted by Railman718 on Wed Jan 30 07:27:12 2008. That's a different question. Like I wrote IN THE THREAD, I can only say here what NYCT has announced PUBLICLY. |
|
|
| (561493) | |
Re: G Train to be cut back to Court Square permanently |
|
|
Posted by Railman718 on Wed Jan 30 07:44:18 2008, in response to Re: G Train to be cut back to Court Square permanently, posted by Terrapin Station on Wed Jan 30 07:29:18 2008. That's a different question.I see, well you know the email route... Like I wrote IN THE THREAD, I can only say here what NYCT has announced PUBLICLY Got you see answer above... |
|
|
| (561651) | |
Re: Fulton Street J/M Station |
|
|
Posted by Wado MP73 on Wed Jan 30 14:25:11 2008, in response to Re: Fulton Street J/M Station, posted by SMAZ on Wed Jan 30 02:51:37 2008. I'm not absolutely sure but IIRC, The northbound tracks and the southbound tracks are on the same level where the tracks enter Nassau St. and the level only starts changing around Spruce or Beekman.You can't plug a double stack directly where the J/Z tracks are side by side and you can't put your stack under Nassau to the point where the levels are different because Nassau is too narrow. Don't forget that there are a bridge and the ramps to it above Park Row. You will probably need some work to secure them (at least the ramps) before digging. No cheap way to do it... |
|
|
| (561719) | |
Re: Fulton Street J/M Station |
|
|
Posted by Wallyhorse on Wed Jan 30 18:37:08 2008, in response to Re: Fulton Street J/M Station, posted by SMAZ on Wed Jan 30 02:55:17 2008. Exactly:The Water Street line DOES need to be built, however, I would build the Nassau connection first since that would give the SAS access to Brooklyn and to assure there will be a downtown connection no matter what. |
|
|
| (561733) | |
Re: Fulton Street J/M Station |
|
|
Posted by Grand concourse on Wed Jan 30 19:04:06 2008, in response to Re: Fulton Street J/M Station, posted by Wallyhorse on Wed Jan 30 18:37:08 2008. Can't argue w/that. Then when Water St is finally built then the SAS can move all service back to Water St [only if it has a tunnel going into Brooklyn though]. |
|
|
| (561744) | |
Re: SAS/four tracks/to Brooklyn and Queens |
|
|
Posted by R160 8818 on Wed Jan 30 19:36:37 2008, in response to Re: SAS/four tracks/to Brooklyn and Queens, posted by Wallyhorse on Wed Jan 30 01:45:14 2008. Yup, your alignments and concepts are rather similar to my plans. I hope the 74th branch could tie up to the LIE so that the residents of East Queens could access Manhattan by subway without having to take a bus first. |
|
|
| (561749) | |
Re: SAS Phase 4: Water Street |
|
|
Posted by Russ on Wed Jan 30 19:45:50 2008, in response to Re: SAS Phase 4: Water Street, posted by Wallyhorse on Wed Jan 30 01:52:24 2008. Then what do you do with the two SAS lines that run down Nassau? One terminates at Chambers because you cant run 40tph on Nassau south of Chambers, and never gets to the Financial District. |
|
|
|
Page 17 of 20 |
||
