1991 Proposed Service Reductions Map

[Lance]

In 1991, the MTA was considering a reduction in service along Central Park West. Their proposal included eliminating the entirely and replacing it with a full-local version of the . It also called for rerouting the from its then-current terminus at 21 St-Queensbridge to 207 Street, running express along Central Park West, as well as the elimination of rush-hour Concourse express service and direct local service to 6th Avenue.
 
The two maps linked below, created by me and based on the maps used for the Subway Weekender, illustrate both proposed service patterns. The first, as mentioned above, has the 6th Avenue running to 207th Street and the second shows the running down 6th Avenue to Brighton Beach, the result of community opposition to the loss of train service in Upper Manhattan.
 
Version 1 ( to 207th Street)
Version 2 ( via 6th Avenue to Brighton Beach)

[GojiMet86]

This would have been fun to see more:

 

[peacemak3r]

Darn, the links don't work for me anymore.

 

Definitely would have been a sight to see.

[Quill Depot]

The links do not work. Actually not a bad proposal in that day and age.

[Baseball02]

As mentioned above, the links don't work.

[Union Tpke]

from the rollsign gallery thread

 

You may remember last week, I said I wasn't ready to post this sign yet. It wasn't so much because the sign itself wasn't ready, but rather because I wanted to finish a couple of other goodies related to this sign. Though in retrospect, I'm glad I waited to post this curtain because I didn't like how it looked before. For the past few weeks, I've been combing the net looking for information about how service would've run with the '91 cuts plan. Eric B's site was a nice starting point, but details were lacking. After doing some digging, I came across an old SubTalk post from many moons ago, which helped shed some light on this subject. With the service patterns known for all of the affected lines, I was finally able to make the map to illustrate this service. I've posted them in the downloads section of this site, but until they're verified, they'll also be hosted on MediaFire.

 

http://www.mediafire.com/view/c29m1t18qqqwtzt/1991+service+capacity+%28ver.+1%29.pdf- Version 1 (Q to 207 St)

http://www.mediafire.com/view/n275lvo2gkuu958/1991+service+capacity+%28ver.+2%2C+orange+A%29.pdf- Version 2 (orange A)

 

Enjoy.

[paulrivera]

Now how much money were those , and plans supposed to save?

 

Imagine if the first proposal actually went through, even if that and nonsense was reverted back to the old (current) / pattern, we'd probably be looking at orange trains in the Bronx and yellow trains in Queens today.

[Lance]

I had to re-upload the maps onto the downloads section to fix an error on them. Until those links are verified, please use the links below:

 

http://www.mediafire.com/download/51f34h287i525zs/1991+service+capacity+%28ver.+1%29.pdf Version 1 (Q to 207 St)

http://www.mediafire.com/view/n275lvo2gkuu958/1991+service+capacity+%28ver.+2%2C+orange+A%29.pdf- Version 2 (orange A)

 

Sorry for the inconvenience.

 

Now how much money were those  ,   and   plans supposed to save?

 

Imagine if the first proposal actually went through, even if that   and   nonsense was reverted back to the old (current)   /   pattern, we'd probably be looking at orange   trains in the Bronx and yellow   trains in Queens today.

 

They might have saved some money with not having the B running to 168 St or the C up Concourse, but that would've probably been offset with the Q running to Inwood. That is unless there were reductions in service overall as well.

 

Regarding service and how such a plan would be run today, with the inclusion of the B/D flip-flop of '04, today's B would likely be the 6th Ave Q while the current B would be a Broadway B.

[Eric B]

I had to re-upload the maps onto the downloads section to fix an error on them. Until those links are verified, please use the links below:

 

http://www.mediafire.com/view/c29m1t18qqqwtzt/1991+service+capacity+%28ver.+1%29.pdf- Version 1 (Q to 207 St)

http://www.mediafire.com/view/n275lvo2gkuu958/1991+service+capacity+%28ver.+2%2C+orange+A%29.pdf- Version 2 (orange A)

 

Sorry for the inconvenience.

On the second map, you also have the blue (which doesn't exist in the whole pattern), still ending at Euclid.

 

I wonder where you got the off-hour patterns from, because I never heard a whole breakdown; just the basic weekday pattern. 

 

In the Fall '89 emergency (asbestos flood) plan, which this was modeled after, the Q ran all times, but cut off at 2nd Ave. off hourse. That wouldn't be necessary in the planned idea, since there would be no such blockage, and I figued int he first version they would just extend the to fill in at 207th (which is identical to current midnight service anyway), but in the second (which was a brief "last ditch" idea before the whole thing was scrapped), i never knohew the would fill in on the off hours.

Now how much money were those , and plans supposed to save?

 

Imagine if the first proposal actually went through, even if that and nonsense was reverted back to the old (current) / pattern, we'd probably be looking at orange trains in the Bronx and yellow trains in Queens today.

 

They might have saved some money with not having the B running to 168 St or the C up Concourse, but that would've probably been offset with the Q running to Inwood. That is unless there were reductions in service overall as well.

 

Regarding service and how such a plan would be run today, with the inclusion of the B/D flip-flop of '04, today's B would likely be the 6th Ave Q while the current B would be a Broadway B.

I always wondered about this as well. Back in an age when it seemed the Q was stuck on 6th Avenue forever. If the thinking regarding Manhattan Bridge route designation hadn't changed, then during the next switch, you would have had "two D services and two Q services", instead of the "two B services and two D services" advertized in the '86 changes. Then, yes, the B would have been simply fixed to Broadway only. Otherwise, if they decided to eliminate the duplicate services (especially since this was a planned long term diversion, unlike '86 which was extended), then they could have still gone on with the circle/diamond "Q" and West End "W" in Brooklyn, and the 207-34th express would become the . (Since it would be freed from 21st, which becomes a shuttle in that pattern anyway, and this would have been somewhat true to its old routing. There wouldn't have been any "B/C switch" of course, but they could have instead restored express, and eliminate both and ). I could imagine when the bridge was finished, and them having done the same studies, everything settling into what we have now, anyway.

 

If they had gone on with the second plan, they would have had to do something, because they would not have had the A split between 6th Ave and Broadway. (Imagine that! Yellow "A" via the "BMT 'A'" track line, to Astoria!) They again would have probably just replaced all of it with the circle/diamond .

[Lance]

On the second map, you also have the blue (which doesn't exist in the whole pattern), still ending at Euclid.

And I had just went over both maps to make sure I didn't miss any errors. It's fixed now if you're interested.

 

I wonder where you got the off-hour patterns from, because I never heard a whole breakdown; just the basic weekday pattern. 

I got it from this old post on SubTalk and combined it with the actual service patterns of the early '90s.

[T to Dyre Avenue]

Nice work on the maps, Lance. I always wanted to see what this "doomsday" pattern would have looked like after hearing so much about it back then.

 

I'm actually surprised they didn't consider something like this during the doomsday cuts of 2009-10. I'm guessing it would have been much harder to carry them out with all four tracks on the Manhattan Bridge open. Probably something along the lines of what Eric B posted here would also have to have been implemented.

 

Er, I mean, thank God this plan never had to be implemented!

[Lance]

I'm actually surprised they didn't consider something like this during the doomsday cuts of 2009-10. I'm guessing it would have been much harder to carry them out with all four tracks on the Manhattan Bridge open. Probably something along the lines of what Eric B posted here would also have to have been implemented.

I think it's evident of how times changed since '91. When this proposal was made, full-day C service was still fairly new, only around for a few years following the '88 service changes that eliminated the 8th Avenue K. Now that 19/7 C service has been around for quite some time, getting rid of it and running the A local would be a non-starter. I guess if they could sell the idea, they could possibly reroute the B off Concourse up to Inwood and extend the A when the B doesn't run.

[MTA Dude]

Wait, Lance, you don't control this site, do you:

http://subwayweekender.wordpress.com/

[T to Dyre Avenue]

I think it's evident of how times changed since '91. When this proposal was made, full-day C service was still fairly new, only around for a few years following the '88 service changes that eliminated the 8th Avenue K. Now that 19/7 C service has been around for quite some time, getting rid of it and running the A local would be a non-starter. I guess if they could sell the idea, they could possibly reroute the B off Concourse up to Inwood and extend the A when the B doesn't run.

I bet if they had called the extended ( Q ) to 207th St service the ( A ) and ran it at least 19/7 (the second map in your original post), while running the as the local to/from 168th during the same hours with an extension to 207 to sub for the ( A ) from midnight to 5 am only, they might have gotten away with it. This proposed "orange A" service might be considered the "M/V combo" of its time (an "A/Q combo"?). At least in 2010, Transit went along with the wishes of the communities served by the ( M ) train and kept the letter , before it got to be too late.

 

 In the Fall '89 emergency (asbestos flood) plan, which this was modeled after, the Q ran all times, but cut off at 2nd Ave. off hourse. That wouldn't be necessary in the planned idea, since there would be no such blockage, and I figued int he first version they would just extend the to fill in at 207th (which is identical to current midnight service anyway), but in the second (which was a brief "last ditch" idea before the whole thing was scrapped), i never knohew the would fill in on the off hours.

 

I always wondered about this as well. Back in an age when it seemed the Q was stuck on 6th Avenue forever. If the thinking regarding Manhattan Bridge route designation hadn't changed, then during the next switch, you would have had "two D services and two Q services", instead of the "two B services and two D services" advertized in the '86 changes. Then, yes, the B would have been simply fixed to Broadway only. Otherwise, if they decided to eliminate the duplicate services (especially since this was a planned long term diversion, unlike '86 which was extended), then they could have still gone on with the circle/diamond "Q" and West End "W" in Brooklyn, and the 207-34th express would become the . (Since it would be freed from 21st, which becomes a shuttle in that pattern anyway, and this would have been somewhat true to its old routing. There wouldn't have been any "B/C switch" of course, but they could have instead restored express, and eliminate both and ). I could imagine when the bridge was finished, and them having done the same studies, everything settling into what we have now, anyway.

 

If they had gone on with the second plan, they would have had to do something, because they would not have had the A split between 6th Ave and Broadway. (Imagine that! Yellow "A" via the "BMT 'A'" track line, to Astoria!) They again would have probably just replaced all of it with the circle/diamond .

I have a feeling the 2001 Manhattan Bridge service plan would have still gone into effect as it did, even if the 1991 service reduction plan went through. Maybe if the Q-to-207th service had been called the ( A ) from the start, it might have just cut off at 34th like the did. The three-pronged 8th Ave/Fulton St express might have stayed intact. Everything else probably would have been implemented as it was (dual services on Brighton, on West End) As for 2004, when the Bridge's north side tracks reopened, we'd maybe have the current West End and Brighton Local services with the ( A ) re-extended back to Brighton Beach. The might still be around today too, given that it wouldn't have been affected by the Manhattan Bridge reconstruction.

[Lance]

Wait, Lance, you don't control this site, do you:

http://subwayweekender.wordpress.com/

Actually I do.

[MTA Dude]

Actually I do.

 

Cool.

[IRT Bronx Express]

I guess if they could sell the idea, they could possibly reroute the B off Concourse up to Inwood and extend the A when the B doesn't run.

The Concourse line is bad enough around 3pm when there's no express service and trains running. The rush hour would be hell without both. If only the ran to Tremont at least, where service between 145 and there are needed the most...

[Armandito]

 

 

In 1991, the MTA was considering a reduction in service along Central Park West. Their proposal included eliminating the entirely and replacing it with a full-local version of the . It also called for rerouting the from its then-current terminus at 21 St-Queensbridge to 207 Street, running express along Central Park West, as well as the elimination of rush-hour Concourse express service and direct local service to 6th Avenue.

 

The two maps linked below, created by me and based on the maps used for the Subway Weekender, illustrate both proposed service patterns. The first, as mentioned above, has the 6th Avenue running to 207th Street and the second shows the running down 6th Avenue to Brighton Beach, the result of community opposition to the loss of train service in Upper Manhattan.

 

Version 1 ( to 207th Street)

Version 2 ( via 6th Avenue to Brighton Beach)

Actually, the links really did work

[Lance]

Right after I created this thread, I noticed an error on the maps and had to re-upload them to this site. That restarted the admin review process, which made the downloads temporarily unavailable. That's obviously been fixed now.

[mine248]

That document link you have with the Orange , the train extended to 34th Street! That would gotten chaos to riders who'd know the for a very long time. The document link on the Orange will get also get chaos to the and Orange riders who'd ride the and Orange trains for very long. But thanks, Lance, for making me know about the MTA in 1991.