ActiveCity

I forgot about that small tunnel at Botanic Garden. The reason I proposed all this is for de-interlining purposes. The B would be the express, and the shuttle or any other letter would be the local.

I know how to "fix" the BMT Franklin Avenue line from Prospect Park to Fulton St. In order for that to happen, the MTA must demolish the Park Place station since it's built on top of the former southbound track. As an alternative, walk to the nearby Botanic Garden station. To make up for this loss, the MTA will extend the platforms at the Botanic Garden station to accommodate 10 car-60 foot trains. Both side platforms will be extended north. In addition, the side platform at the Fulton St station will be converted to an island platform. This island platform will be extended south to accommodate 10 car-60 foot trains with a new southbound track. Lastly, there will be a crossover track south of the extended Fulton St station. Thoughts?

City Hall (lower level) to Rockaway Park-Beach 116th St. Broadway/Queens Blvd/Rockaways.

Build the Trinity Place connection to the Montague St tunnel.

I have a better idea, have the run there instead. I'll explain how. South of Canal St on the tracks, there's a bellmouth in both directions that were supposed to run east. These tracks were intended for the Utica Avenue local line. Instead, you plan to have it connect to the and lines. However, this is not feasible because the line would run in an unusual path. Under my plan, this line would run under Worth St and East Broadway to it's terminus at Union Avenue to connect with the and lines.

sounds like bee, sounds like see, and sounds like tea. 🤷‍♂️

That's what it was called in the 1968 program for action plan, but the IND Queens Blvd line east of 71st Avenue is 4 tracks so it would be logical sense to use them.

The 63rd St line was meant to be a Queens Blvd bypass via the LIRR right of way. The plan called for a 6th Avenue service (M), as well as a 2nd Avenue service (Y). The line would've had a station at Northern Blvd and 41st Avenue, with a passageway transfer to the underground Queens Plaza station. In addition, the 63rd St line would've ramped up to the local tracks at 75th Avenue with a lower level station at 71st Avenue. As a result, this would've shifted the (E) and (F) services from local to express east of 71st Avenue. Finally, it would've allowed (G) service to terminate at 71st Avenue with (R) service to the Rockaways. It all makes sense now, doesn't it?

Fun fact, the Chambers St station on the IND Eight Avenue line was not meant to be the last stop. One example of this is that the station lacks layup tracks which is unusual for IND construction. In addition, the BMT Broadway and IND Eight Avenue lines both run under Church St. This is relevant because both lines are within the same level of each other and are only a few hundred feet away from each othtunnel er. Infact, the IND wanted to extend the line further south to connect with the Court St station on the IND Fulton St line. This would've required taking over the BMT Broadway line and the construction of a new East River tunnel. This East River tunnel would've been built at the Whitehall St station by using the bell mouth provisions. If built, Broadway trains would've been truncated to City Hall station. And finally, the Montague St tunnel would've been served by Nassau Loop trains.

The MTA needs to convert the lower level of City Hall station into a terminal station. The staircases to the lower level as well as the crossover tracks from Canal St are already in place. In addition, there are two side platforms on the lower level. In order to activate the lower level, it needs to be properly aligned with the upper level. Lastly, it would include the removal of the third track just like what the MTA did with 42nd St shuttle not too long ago which is doing just fine.

The 50th st merge is a problem. The C or E train sometimes gets held in the station when it should be held in the tunnel.

Phew.

The MTA should consider a new Worth St line from the Canal St (A, C, E) station to the Broadway station. Phase 1 should be the East Broadway crosstown line, and phase 2 should be the South 4th St crosstown line via a new East River tunnel.

We need an Astoria Yard.

Keep in mind that the Sea Beach line is supposed to be served by 4th Avenue express trains, while the West End and Bay Ridge lines are supposed to be served by 4th Avenue local trains. This is all based on the current track layout.

Use the City Hall lower level instead.

I'd probably try the (X) route at this point.

This is possibly the best transit plan for northeast Queens I can come up with. To start off, I plan to have a new 79th St crosstown line with a connection to the local tracks at 46th St on the IND Queens Blvd line. I call it the line. Northern terminus: Amsterdam Av-72nd St . Southern terminus: Rockaway Park-Beach 116th St . In addition, I plan to replace all train service with train service on Queens Blvd permanently and I will explain why. Once the train is taken of Queens Blvd, this is where a new line arises. I call this line the BMT Horace Harding Expressway line or the BMT Northeast Queens line. This two track subway would run under the streets of 21st St, Ditmars Blvd, Astoria Blvd, 112th St, and the Horace Harding Expressway.

This may sound controversial, but here's my thoughts on a new subway line. There should be an 86th St crosstown line with a connection to the IND Queens Blvd line at 46 St. This new train service would run from it's northern terminus at Central Park West to it's southern terminus at Beach-149 St in the Rockaways. It would also merge with the and trains along it's route. In addition, the train would replace the train on Queens Blvd due to excess capacity. Once the train is taken off Queens Blvd, this is where the real fun begins. A new northeast Queens line would be built at the site of the 11th St cut which would need to be modified to curve north. Such a line would run under the streets of 21st St, Astoria Blvd, 112 St, and the Horace Harding Expressway. If all of this is actually built, we would see major development.

Not a lot of people talk about the bottleneck at Essex St on the Northbound BMT platforms. When the J and M arrive at Essex St, one train is forced to wait due to the line merging into one track. This issue can simply be fixed by adding a new switch for the J to use before merging with the M. The middle track platform would need to be discontinued.

I wonder how different the subway would be today if the Ashland Place connection was built instead of the Chrystie St connection every single day.

Yes, just like how the White Plains Road line was supposed to be a part of the 6 track second avenue subway in a 1929 plan.

Because it was originally supposed to be a 4 track line. If it were a 4 track line, the B would be local to Bedford Park Blvd at all times no matter what.

The 125th St spur is just wasteful. Just take the M60.