|
|
| Re: Second Ave Alignment Change (637196) | |
 |
|
| Home > SubChat | |
[ Post a New Response | Return to the Index ]
|
Page 8 of 8 |
||
|
| (640709) | |
Re: Second Ave Alignment Change |
|
|
Posted by Grand concourse on Fri Jun 27 13:33:40 2008, in response to Re: Second Ave Alignment Change, posted by Andrew Saucci on Wed Jun 25 20:10:45 2008. Technically can't they have a semi-wall built along the outer tracks to cut down on the noise further? |
|
|
| (640711) | |
Re: Second Ave Alignment Change |
|
|
Posted by RonInBayside on Fri Jun 27 13:38:33 2008, in response to Re: Second Ave Alignment Change, posted by Sand Box John on Wed Jun 25 21:58:26 2008. Good point John. |
|
|
| (640820) | |
Re: Second Ave Alignment Change |
|
|
Posted by Eric B on Fri Jun 27 19:01:02 2008, in response to Re: Second Ave Alignment Change, posted by Hank Eisenstein on Mon Jun 23 12:15:27 2008. Let alone removing an alternate terminal for any ENY-based service via 6th Ave. (Instead of the impractical idea of merging the V and M). Also, at the last major CB hearing, they also mentioned the extra track as being planned for the event the Bridge ever closes again. Now, when the T starts running, both Q and dimond Q would all have to go to 96th/125th. (and are they going to cut the third track from there too?) So basically, if the north side closes, one of the Bway services would have to be cut altogether, and probably replaced with the M.All because of this budget crunch now. Once they do this, it will be final. It just causes more problems than it solves. They're only thinking about the moment, and not the future. How much funds will this cut even raise? If they want to cut this, then lengthern the platforms in the Eastern Div. and then through routing the V would be more practical. Or, build the connection from Essex to the Second Ave. line. But that would probably be too diruptive (that was apart of Shallow Chrystie, and they're going with Deep Chrystie). (There was actually supposed to be two tracks on the perimeter of 14th St., not one near 42nd. So I'll wonder if they'll cut those too. But then that's if they ever even get down there!) |
|
|
(Sponsored) |
iPhone 6 (4.7 Inch) Premium PU Leather Wallet Case - Red w/ Floral Interior - by Notch-It |
|
| (640881) | |
Re: Second Ave Alignment Change |
|
|
Posted by AEM-7AC #901 on Fri Jun 27 21:39:06 2008, in response to Re: Second Ave Alignment Change, posted by Eric B on Fri Jun 27 19:01:02 2008. Let alone removing an alternate terminal for any ENY-based service via 6th Ave.Supposedly, once when I came up with the original idea for the "Water Street Subway", I was told that there would not be enough capacity for the V to run with the B & D to Grand Street. So, would there be any extra capacity for an extra service during peak hours on the 6th Ave Local? So basically, if the north side closes, one of the Bway services would have to be cut altogether, and probably replaced with the M. There's always Astoria. Hell, maybe just for fun, they could build a mini-spur into Rego Park off the Queens Local and the provisions near 63rd Drive... |
|
|
| (641041) | |
Re: Second Ave Alignment Change |
|
|
Posted by Eric B on Sat Jun 28 10:49:21 2008, in response to Re: Second Ave Alignment Change, posted by AEM-7AC #901 on Fri Jun 27 21:39:06 2008. Supposedly, once when I came up with the original idea for the "Water Street Subway", I was told that there would not be enough capacity for the V to run with the B & D to Grand Street. So, would there be any extra capacity for an extra service during peak hours on the 6th Ave Local?I wondered about that, and I was hoping we could at least have the terminal for weekends. That's when we needed it more than anything else. (Since it's just a shuttle over here now). Of course, weekends we could easily have the M/V combo (since the V would not need to run to Church Av then), and I've already put in a suggestion for that, but 72nd, would be much easier to start up from one end (to eliminate the problem of having to bring the ENY cars to the JYD end). There's always Astoria. Hell, maybe just for fun, they could build a mini-spur into Rego Park off the Queens Local and the provisions near 63rd Drive... But the problem is, if the 6th Av side is closed, and all the service is on Bway, then you already have the N and W at Astoria (just like now. The only difference is that the W would be extended to Bklyn, of course). So that is out. Though again; I'm talking about way down the line, when Phase 3 is completed; with both the Q and T running. And who knows; by the time that is completed, the just completed rebuilding of the Manhattan Bridge might have worn old, and new rounds of repairs needed. |
|
|
| (641169) | |
Re: Second Ave Alignment Change |
|
|
Posted by Steve B-8AVEXP on Sat Jun 28 13:59:01 2008, in response to Re: Second Ave Alignment Change, posted by Eric B on Sat Jun 28 10:49:21 2008. If it hasn't collapsed altogether. |
|
|
| (645040) | |
Re: Bronx Third Avenue El |
|
|
Posted by Wallyhorse on Sun Jul 6 10:27:09 2008, in response to Re: Second Ave Alignment Change, posted by SMAZ on Wed Jun 25 02:25:11 2008. That may be true, however:With $5 a gallon gas likely before the year is out and high fuel prices likely here to stay, that might not have been attractive even last year. With such now, however, it may very well will be, and that includes a rebuilt Third Avenue El in the Bronx that could be the Bronx leg of the SAS by the time such would get built. It would probably be faster and cheaper to build new elevated lines that I actually think are not the worst things at all (while it may block the sunlight, that also might not be the worst thing either, and especially if such can be built to be less noisy as the Lion keeps saying). |
|
|
| (645210) | |
Re: Second Ave Alignment Change |
|
|
Posted by 156n3rd on Sun Jul 6 20:32:27 2008, in response to Re: Second Ave Alignment Change, posted by JournalSquare-K-Car on Sat Jun 21 00:13:14 2008. Proper shelling s-h-i-t. |
|
|
| (645213) | |
Re: Bronx Third Avenue El |
|
|
Posted by 156n3rd on Sun Jul 6 20:38:33 2008, in response to Re: Bronx Third Avenue El, posted by Wallyhorse on Sun Jul 6 10:27:09 2008. Has anyone evr heard of new els going up anywhere? It's too late to think about resurrecting one unless they can enclose it above ground. That would keep it quiet, but the dark streets would return. Any time I have gone back my old neighborhood, it seems like another world without the el. Even the block where my family lived at my birth (Hegney Pl.) has new houses on them that look like garbage. It's just my feeling that I'd love to see the old block the way it was. As for building a TAS, nice dream. |
|
|
| (645248) | |
Re: Bronx Third Avenue El |
|
|
Posted by Wallyhorse on Sun Jul 6 22:05:06 2008, in response to Re: Bronx Third Avenue El, posted by 156n3rd on Sun Jul 6 20:38:33 2008. That may be now, but with environmental issues and high fuel prices becoming much bigger, what we thought might never happen again (including stuff I would not have even suggested even last year) now has to be at least looked at in my opinion, and that includes rebuilding at least the Bronx portion of the Third Avenue El that can become the Bronx leg of the SAS in the future. People might be up in arms at first, but if properly educated on such, they would probably come to realize the benefits outweigh the inconviences in this case.And yes, rebuilding former elevated lines is a much cheaper option that unlike in the past I don't think would depress a neighborhood at all, especially if done right. |
|
|
| (645300) | |
Re: Bronx Third Avenue El |
|
|
Posted by R160 8818 on Sun Jul 6 23:55:42 2008, in response to Re: Bronx Third Avenue El, posted by Wallyhorse on Sun Jul 6 22:05:06 2008. use concrete viaducts, like the ones they use in the market street el rehab in philly |
|
|
| (645374) | |
Re: Bronx Third Avenue El |
|
|
Posted by Bob Andersen on Mon Jul 7 07:47:18 2008, in response to Re: Bronx Third Avenue El, posted by R160 8818 on Sun Jul 6 23:55:42 2008. Or like JFK Airtrain. |
|
|
| (645781) | |
Re: Bronx Third Avenue El |
|
|
Posted by Wallyhorse on Tue Jul 8 00:39:34 2008, in response to Re: Bronx Third Avenue El, posted by R160 8818 on Sun Jul 6 23:55:42 2008. Exactly:It may be taking longer than planned to rebuild the Market-Frankford El here in Philly, but it is being done right. NYCTA ought to look at how the El is being rebuilt here to see how a modern El can be built. |
|
|
| (645784) | |
Re: Bronx Third Avenue El |
|
|
Posted by WestEndExpress on Tue Jul 8 00:51:46 2008, in response to Re: Bronx Third Avenue El, posted by 156n3rd on Sun Jul 6 20:38:33 2008. The BART system at San Francisco Bay has elevated sections on private rights of way. The noise levels are very low. I ate in an outside restaurant,a half block from the BART line in Richmond, and could barely hear the train go by.Miani's system is all elevated as is Vancouver's |
|
|
| (645909) | |
Re: Bronx Third Avenue El |
|
|
Posted by Broadway Lion on Tue Jul 8 10:44:47 2008, in response to Re: Bronx Third Avenue El, posted by Wallyhorse on Tue Jul 8 00:39:34 2008. NYCTA, I am *sure* *KNOWS* how to build a modern, quiet el that has minimal light occlusion at the street level. The NIMBYS are the ones in the dark and thus are a stumbling stone to the enlightened.ROAR |
|
|
| (646156) | |
Re: Bronx Third Avenue El |
|
|
Posted by Wallyhorse on Wed Jul 9 00:26:52 2008, in response to Re: Bronx Third Avenue El, posted by Broadway Lion on Tue Jul 8 10:44:47 2008. Exactly:That's why they need to be educated on this. If the NIMBYS would look at how SEPTA has rebuilt the Market-Frankford Line, they would realize that it can be done. |
|
|
| (646286) | |
Re: Bronx Third Avenue El |
|
|
Posted by Mellow One on Wed Jul 9 11:26:41 2008, in response to Re: Bronx Third Avenue El, posted by Broadway Lion on Tue Jul 8 10:44:47 2008. If it ever come to pass, a replacement for the 3rd Ave El in the Bronx could be built over the Metro North Harlem ROW to increase the capacity of that line. An alternate El route would be Webster Ave, A wide, straight north-south route. The route over third Ave in the Bronx would never be replicated. Another alternate route for rapid transit in the Bronx is the former New Haven Shore line. This was to be the route of the fabled Second Ave Subway in the Bronx to the Dyre Ave Line (the former NYW&B) ROW, which used to connect with NH ROW. The northern end of the shore line is now well populated at Co-op City.As for replacing Els, they (whom ever that may be) probably need to be considering replacement of the original (1904) Westchester Ave route and the Broadway Line in the Bronx and the Broadway El in Brooklyn, which are now, the oldest structures. I think the 125th St viaduct on the Broadway line may last for another 100 years, although the approach structures may need to be examined and verified. In the previous paragraph, I noted the NH Shorline, which contains many aging draw bridges (over salt water) all the way up the line to New Haven and then some, which are in the 100+ year age category. The Metro North Park Ave viaduct to the Harlem River is over 100 years old now also. We have already witnessed the results of deferred maintenance on the East River spans. |
|
|
|
Page 8 of 8 |
||
