L train extension. (thought)

L train extension. (thought) (895804)	Home · Maps · About

Home > SubChat

[ Post a New Response | Return to the Index ]

(895804)	view threaded
L train extension. (thought)
Posted by N6 Limited on Fri Feb 5 19:59:33 2010 edf40wrjww2msgDetail:detailStr fiogf49gjkf0d If the money was there, what would you think of an L train extension up 10th Ave to the 72nd st station on the "7th ave line" (I used quotes because it's under Broadway at that point.) With this taking place, I would suggest that the 7 get extended to 10th Ave only, or the Extended L line could be shifted over to 11th Ave south of 42nd to West Street then the current terminal at 14th St. The 7 could share tracks with the line and have a WTC-like Terminal at the Javits Center
Post a New Response

(895810)	view threaded
Re: L train extension. (thought)
Posted by insidetransitcom* on Fri Feb 5 20:18:22 2010, in response to L train extension. (thought), posted by N6 Limited on Fri Feb 5 19:59:33 2010.* edf40wrjww2msgDetail:detailStr fiogf49gjkf0d sounds good to me - i lived on 10th ave and 53rd for a year and frankly it was horrible for transit - the m50 is a bus of doom and the m31 needed a stop at the corner - just a pain in the butt bus too.
Post a New Response

(896792)	view threaded
Re: L train extension. (thought)
Posted by znufrii* on Mon Feb 8 16:56:13 2010, in response to L train extension. (thought), posted by N6 Limited on Fri Feb 5 19:59:33 2010.* edf40wrjww2msgDetail:detailStr fiogf49gjkf0d I think it does more good keeping the bulk of a theoretical new Westside trunk line on 10th Ave, as it will remain more accessible to a greater area. How much demand would there be west of the line, besides access to the Javits Center, if it were on 11th instead of 10th?
Post a New Response

(Sponsored)

iPhone 6 (4.7 Inch) Premium PU Leather Wallet Case - Red w/ Floral Interior - by Notch-It

(896804)	view threaded
Re: L train extension. (thought)
Posted by BrooklynBus* on Mon Feb 8 17:24:38 2010, in response to L train extension. (thought), posted by N6 Limited on Fri Feb 5 19:59:33 2010.* edf40wrjww2msgDetail:detailStr fiogf49gjkf0d What I never understood is why no one ever proposed using the High Line as an extension for the L. I think I thought of it around 30 years ago.
Post a New Response

(896805)	view threaded
Re: L train extension. (thought)
Posted by trainsarefun* on Mon Feb 8 17:27:05 2010, in response to Re: L train extension. (thought), posted by BrooklynBus on Mon Feb 8 17:24:38 2010.* edf40wrjww2msgDetail:detailStr fiogf49gjkf0d The neighborhoods changed drastically. That chance was lost long ago.
Post a New Response

(896829)	view threaded
Re: L train extension. (thought)
Posted by Edwards!* on Mon Feb 8 19:12:19 2010, in response to Re: L train extension. (thought), posted by trainsarefun on Mon Feb 8 17:27:05 2010.* edf40wrjww2msgDetail:detailStr fiogf49gjkf0d The IND should have built the 10th Ave line when it was first proposed.
Post a New Response

(896900)	view threaded
Re: L train extension. (thought)
Posted by Train Dude* on Mon Feb 8 22:23:35 2010, in response to L train extension. (thought), posted by N6 Limited on Fri Feb 5 19:59:33 2010.* edf40wrjww2msgDetail:detailStr fiogf49gjkf0d It seems to me that the simplest solution would have been to bring the (L) above ground west of 8th Ave and onto the high line north to the uper west side or south to Chelsea. Of course that land was given to the city with the provision that it never be used for rail transit.
Post a New Response

(896922)	view threaded
Re: L train extension. (thought)
Posted by BrooklynBus* on Mon Feb 8 23:17:09 2010, in response to Re: L train extension. (thought), posted by Train Dude on Mon Feb 8 22:23:35 2010.* edf40wrjww2msgDetail:detailStr fiogf49gjkf0d That never should have been done because using the High Line would have been much more cost efficient than building a subway and it doesn't go over any street blocking out light like an el does.
Post a New Response

[ Return to the Message Index ]