Caelestor

I played around with the app and added some fantasy extensions here: http://app.enmodal.co/?id=ad8151a17872190e# I went for low-hanging fruit expansion, and in particular I tried to improve lines with inefficient terminals as much as possible. Services extended: : Extended down Nostrand Ave to Avenue X. : Extended down Utica Ave to Kings Plaza. : Express on Fulton St, extended east to Liberty Ave. All trains run to Howard Beach or one of the Rockaway terminals. : Extended east to Rosedale via the LIRR ROW as originally planned in the 1980s. : Extended up 10 Ave to 72 St. : Extended north to Co-op City (MNR) via 3rd / Park Aves and Fordham Road. : 125 St / Broadway - Euclid Ave via 125 St, SAS, and the IND Fulton St local tracks. : Hanover Square - 179 St via the QBL Bypass. (For simplicity I kept the existing QBL configuration, but open to swapping the and if needed). Possible extension to Euclid Ave if demand warrants it; Hanover Sq might have to be reconfigured in order to terminate trains from Queens.

Astoria riders who want Midtown (the majority) are ambivalent to either the or . South of 34 St, I'm pretty certain most Astoria riders would want local service, since the serves 23 St, NYU, and the Financial District. Brooklyn riders are better off transferring to the at Lex Ave - 59 St. IMO the only practical solution is to send more rush hour trains onto SAS, with a 1-to-1 replacement in Astoria. Doing so increases the effective capacity of 3 lines: SAS obviously Every local-express merge removed increases the Broadway tph capacity by 1 Astoria doesn't get more tph, but the reduced delays at both 34 St and Ditmars Blvd leads to increased service in practice All trains run to Astoria outside peak hours, because honestly the current arrangement works reasonably well for middays and weekends. When SAS Phase 2 opens, SAS ridership will increase by at least 50 percent, and then the must be sent up SAS at all times.

Additional thoughts: Service has increased for riders on the Dyre Ave, New Lots, and South Ferry Branch lines, as well as Lexington Ave of course. WPR riders now have faster Brooklyn service via Lexington Ave 24/7, since the new runs express at all times. Not sure if the should be running on 12 minute headways instead of 8 though. If anything, the and need to swap headways on weekends. The now runs to 14 St at all times. The MTA should make this late night extension permanent once construction finishes.

Not a bad idea. Leaves room for an extension along 125 St in Manhattan via Randalls Island. Probably a better version of the proposed Triboro RX since LIC, Williamsburg, and Downtown Brooklyn are served.

I'm against it because the 63 St capacity needs to be used for the Queens Bypass line.

You wouldn't even need a shuttle. Have trains alternate between Far Rockaway and Rockaway Park.

The Woodhaven Blvd station is rather wide. New island platforms would be constructed currently where the local tracks are, with stairs and elevators leading up to the mezzanine. The local tracks would be moved outside the island platforms. The 1968 Program for Action LIE plan has a QBL branch that splits just west of and under Woodhaven Blvd, running to Kissena Blvd in Phase 1 and Springfield Blvd in Phase 2.

Most travel is in-state, but given NYC's size, there should be sufficient demand for better cross-river options. I actually think the Gateway project should have a station in Bergenline. I would've sent the there but the route doesn't work out, though a future 50 St Crosstown line that crosses both the Hudson and East Rivers is another opportunity. Yes, it's expensive, but do we really want more buses going through the Lincoln Tunnel and an expensive rebuild of PABT? As for Brooklyn, I prioritize a Nostrand Ave extension, an SAS connection with Fulton St, and then a new Utica Ave line. From an engineering and political standpoint, extensions of existing lines are significantly easier. Also, the line could use the extra capacity that an actual terminal station would provide.

In general, building underground is an order of magnitude more expensive than above ground. For that reason, a lot of transit systems build terminals, crossovers, and storage yards above ground. I've already stated that the SAS - 63 St / QBL connection is too important to forgo because that connection will provide half the capacity of SAS south of 63 St. There doesn't need be a connection between SAS and the Manhattan Bridge at Grand St because the two-track SAS will not have the capacity to support reroutes efficiently. I'm also of the opinion that the extra storage tracks around 14 St are frankly unnecessary, and should be replaced by tail tracks in Phase 3.

To be clear, I think a 50 St station should be built in preparation for a 50 St Crosstown Line to Queens, but I foresee budget overruns leading to this station to be cut. I also think a 34 St entrance at 32 St, and moving the 23 St entrance to 20 St makes more sense. In order: extension to 3 Ave - 149 St service to 14 St / Houston St / Grand St service from SAS to Jamaica - 179 St via Queens bypass line service to Hanover Sq extension to Sheepshead Bay to improve capacity SAS extension to Fordham Plaza extension down Utica Ave service connected to Fulton St local tracks. converted to full-time express service to Lefferts Blvd, runs to Rockaways only. New 50 St - Northern Blvd crosstown line extension along 10 Ave Rockaway Beach Branch reactivated Triboro RX as proposed, except the north part of the line runs along 125 St to Broadway SAS extension to Co-op City

There were two proposals for a Staten Island Tunnel, both of which used the BMT Fourth Ave Line. The northern route diverges from the BMT Fourth Ave Line local tracks south of 59 St and would have run to Tompkinsville. An incomplete tunnel still exists today. The southern route would be an extension of the BMT line to Grasmere via the ROW currently occupied by the Verrazano-Narrows Bridge. The BMT 4th Ave line tracks were extended from 86 St to a temporary terminal at 95 St, and it's assumed that the express tracks would have been extended south from 59 St along the east side of 4 Ave. The most likely pattern is simply extending the local tracks to Staten Island, making the services along the BMT 4 Ave unchanged unchanged extended to SI extended to SI Staten Island via the Culver line is too circuitous compared to the BMT line, so it was never considered.

The 10 Ave extension would only have stations at major destinations. Note that the stops roughly sync up with the SAS for comparison. 23 St: Chelsea Piers. Additional exit at 25/26 St. 34 St: Hudson Yards. 41 St: PABT, Transfer to the . Additional exits at 42 and 44 Sts. 57 St: Additional exit at 60 St to access Lincoln Center. 72 St: Transfer to the . A station at 50 St would probably be dropped in the planning phase because 44 and 57 Sts are only separated by 13 blocks.

The QBL connection at 63 St is too important to cut: it serves the future Queens - SAS service and gives the closer yard access. The more prudent option would be to end Phase 3 at 14 St for the transfer and to relieve the worst congestion on the . The tunnel would extend south of 14 St and the tail tracks would replace the storage tracks.

Lexington Ave - 125 St is between Hudson Yards and PATH WTC in terms of usefulness. Without the or a 125 St extension to the West Side, the major destination station would be the medical area around 72 St, and SAS would serve as an alternative route in case of a full-line closure of the south of 125 St. I do think there is a market for MNR riders to make the transfer at 125 St, but the stops between 55 and 23 Sts need to be built to serve those riders. Grand Concourse isn't a bad terminal, but I prefer a station at the Hub. The Hub is a bigger "destination" than Grand Concourse, and 3 Ave has double the ridership of Grand Concourse. Also, 3 Ave - 149 St is a less complex site since there's no underground junctions, and a station there should be easier to construct.

Honestly, there's no reason to build Lex Ave - 125 St as a three-track station, since the is at least 20 years away. Further extension west along 125 St would make a three track station somewhat useless as well. That said, I still say that a standalone Bronx extension with stops at 106 St, 116 St, 3 Ave - 138 St, and 3 Ave - 149 St would be the most cost-effective. Just as Phase 1 relieved the , SAS to the Bronx would relieve both the and . Lex Ave - 125 St only becomes useful if Phase 3 or the 125 St Crosstown is built, which may take several decades.

The solution is to put trains into service earlier. The three minute headways only apply for an hour each peak period. That said, the MTA is increasing service during the next schedule update, so relief may already be coming Sent from my SM-N910V using Tapatalk

I think a nice QoL improvement would be to extend it to 14 St, for access to Penn Station and the .

Queens Village LIRR

Broadway isn't actually running at capacity, since the takes up slots on both the local and express tracks. Sending some more trains to 96 St and converting Astoria trains to trains will increase capacity. Instead of terminating the at 9 Ave and messing up the switches on the 4 Ave line, the MTA could run more rush-hour only trains (one trip from Gravesend to Astoria via Whitehall St and return trip back).

The 1950s plan had the 63 St / superexpress line connecting to the full Rockaway Branch. The 1960s Program for Action rerouted the superexpress towards Forest Hills. The line would have used an empty trackbed formerly used by the Rockaway Branch, and a barrier could be erected to allow for operation next to LIRR. The bypass would run underneath Yellowstone Blvd and stop underneath the existing Forest Hills station, with a connection to the local tracks east of the station. There's no discussion of what services would run, but since the bypass only connects to the local tracks, it's probable that all bypass service would have run local to 179 St. We had a discussion about what services to run if the bypass is every completed, but some posters and I believe the plan should be unchanged 6 Ave Local, 63 St / Bypass, QBL Local to 179 St unchanged unchanged unchanged, future rerouting towards Rockaway Branch 2 Ave Local, 63 St, QBL Express to 179 St

You don't need express service on the Port Washington Branch, since the stop spacing is already higher than every subway line. In Asian countries, the line would be turned into rapid transit regional rail with high frequency, but given how bad LIRR is, it's better to incorporate the line into the subway system and free up more capacity for the Main Line. There would presumably be trains to Great Neck every 4 minutes under the proposed plan, but there's no easy solution for the single-tracking stretch afterwards. There has been talk of extending Track 2 at Great Neck, which could create more space to turn back trains in preparation for ESA. Also, conversion would require the line to be shut down, and then it'd be significantly easier to construct the terminal crossovers then.

I'd keep it simple too and only connect the bypass tracks to the local tracks. To siphon riders off of QBL, the bypass trains should be making every stop east of Forest Hills. There's not enough capacity on the Archer Ave line to run Bypass trains to Jamaica Center. The problem is that the 53, 60, and 63 St tunnels will be at capacity once trains start running along the bypass. The Port Washington Branch trains have to stay on the mainline tracks until another tunnel is built, which arguably should be reserved for a Northern Blvd line and another service to eastern / southeastern Queens.

TBMs make the job quite easier, and since there's no street above, the disruption would be less than SAS. CBTC allows trains to run closer, but I doubt the current 30 tph can be increased due to interlining. Certainly, train service would run more reliably. The service plan seems to be Queens Blvd Exp, 8 Ave Local: 15 hph Queens Blvd Bypass, 6 Ave Local: 15 tph Queens Blvd Local, 6 Ave Local: 10 tph Queens Blvd Local, Broadway Local: 10 tph Queens Blvd Exp, 2 Ave Local: 10 - 12 tph, maybe 15 tph if the signaling system turns out to be really good Agreed on Forest Hills, but is there room for a connection to the express tracks as well? There are tracks leading to the Jamaica Yard which might complicate construction. Not a bad plan, but will the residents want a line under Skillman Ave? Maybe a stop at 39 St would entice them. I don't recommend connecting to the 53 St line either.

Ideally, we want the Bypass to be able to access both Jamaica Center and Jamaica - 179 St. Good for service reroutes. Also, Mets-Willet Point is near the yard and much easier to modify. The only other infill station I can think of is Lex - 59 St , but that didn't really disrupt daily operations. If Columbus Circle was never changed to an express stop, I doubt the MTA will adjust Jackson Heights either. Forgot about the Port Washington Branch. The stretch after WOOD Interlocking would have to be underground then, which would definitely raise costs. Given the cost of stations and the relative lack of them on the bypass, I still think the Bypass would have a decent cost-benefit ratio.

I have no idea why everyone wants to bring back the . 103 St, 110 St, 116 St, and 137 St are all top 120 in ridership, and 125 St ridership is likely to increase as Columbia builds out its second campus, so running express on that stretch is really not recommended. Lots of college students living uptown take the south to get to school.