Y2Julio Posted July 18, 2009 Share #26 Posted July 18, 2009 whats their email adress to email them? I believe he used this thing called the US Postal Service B) MTA (Metropolitan Transportation Authority) C/O Howard Roberts President New York City Transit 2 Broadway New York, NY, 10004 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eric B Posted July 18, 2009 Share #27 Posted July 18, 2009 Interesting bit of information. Good that they are looking forward to after the recession for resuming increases. Sure hope they put the weekend extension to Manhattan back on the table! So the midnight would run to 57th and not Queens? You would think they were doing it for Queens. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LRG Posted July 18, 2009 Share #28 Posted July 18, 2009 Interesting bit of information. Good that they are looking forward to after the recession for resuming increases. Sure hope they put the weekend extension to Manhattan back on the table!So the midnight would run to 57th and not Queens? You would think they were doing it for Queens. WTH, you got a $6 MetroCard?! :mad: But the to Manhattan would be beneficial, although I really think that it should head to Queens. That guy knows what the passengers want, and although right now, money in the MTA is tight, but I think that he can give passengers what they really should deserve. Heck, I might as well propose my idea for service and see if I can get a free MetroCard. :-/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Y2Julio Posted July 18, 2009 Share #29 Posted July 18, 2009 NYCT transit servicesHoward H Roberts, JR. Mmmm this sounds odd. New York City Transit transit services? Mind scanning the original? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shortline Bus Posted July 18, 2009 Author Share #30 Posted July 18, 2009 Mmmm this sounds odd. New York City Transit transit services? Mind scanning the original? I dont have a scanner at home sorry. Just my laptop, printer and flash drive. However i did get an actual reply from President Roberts. I am not a very good typist/speller despite having a Bachelor degree lol.:tdown: If you want Julio if you willing to wait a few days i can scan it on my flash drive and send the letter via PM. Like many superheros (joking)i dont need to have my 'real name' on these boards known;) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shortline Bus Posted July 18, 2009 Author Share #31 Posted July 18, 2009 Thanks guys for reply. Feel free to comment more on reply letter.B) Without further any further delay here copy of letter i got back this morning97/17/09 on the issues raised in my most recent letter. For my privacy my real name/address is not included. MTA NYC Transit President Howard Roberts 2 Broadway New york ny 10004 Hudson River Hudson river Valley NY 12590 July 10, 2009 Dear Hudson River. This is in reply to your recent letter dated June 2009 which included several suggestions to improve subway service. Your suggestions include operating the service later into the evening, extending late night service to Manhattan and or Queens, and merging the and (Z)service using the Chrystie street connection. In response to your first two suggestions, the division of operations Planning reguarly conducts passenger counts at key station locations, calaculates the operating frequencies needed to meet rider demand, and adjust schedules and service spans accordingly, where feasible. Both late evening and weekend time periods is the fastest growing in terms of passenger growth. New York city Transit does recognize that due to occasional delays in service and special events such as ballgames and concerts at Madison Square Garden or Yankee Stadium for instance, some trains experience heavy crowding levels. On the 8th avenue line, we do have on occasion, have some standing room conditions on the and lines between 145th Street and Nostrand Avenue in late evening mainly due to events at the Garden. However our current surveys have found that ridership levels on late evening trains between 11pm-1am following the end of evening service on the are within MTA guidelines. Similarly, ridership levels on the late night trains mainly between 1130pm-1am when it operates local via Whitehall Street in lieu of full service trains are also within guidelines. Prior to the downturn in the economy, NYCT was studying operating the ®between Bay Ridge and Forest Hills, Queens, and the via the Manhatatn Bridge full time 24 hours a day. With that said, due to the current economy we cannot provide any form of service increases at this time. When the recession ends, we will take a look at extending the service hours of the by running it at least between 168th Street and the World Trade Center stop. Also running the partially at least between Manhattan and Bay Ridge, Brooklyn will also be discussed. We also reviewed your suggestion to merge the and lines as a weekday peak hour service. While this extended service along the and routes would have benefits for 1-seat Midtown service for riders along the Brooklyn-Broadway line, and also relieve overcrowding on the nearby line it would also inconvenience other customers along 6th Avenue and Queens Blvd who wish to get to Lower East Side area and the West 4th Street station as well. Currently the trains are comprised mostly of eight 75-foot cars. Opearting the on the Jamaica Avenue or Mytrle avenue lines would require use of eight 60-foot R-160's cars. Currently there are not enough cars needed to extend the via the Chrystie Street connection/Williamsburg Bridge. In addition, when the Culver bridge project is complete around 2012, we plan to extend the to Kings Highway during rush hours. We appreciate your interest in NYCT transit services and Thank you for taking the time to write the letter. Enclosed is a Metrocard for $6.00. Sincearly Howard H Roberts, JR. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KNIGHTRIDER3:16 Posted July 18, 2009 Share #32 Posted July 18, 2009 That was nice LOL they gave you A 6 dollar metrocard hehe go Railfanning with it :cool: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B35 via Church Posted July 18, 2009 Share #33 Posted July 18, 2009 how ironic... after being ripped off by one of the MVM's @ 42nd st/bryant pk, I gave in that metrocard survey/questionnaire (whatever it's called), and I actually got a $25.00 metrocard back... here's a scan (pic') of part of the letter.... ....anyway, cool that you got 6 bucks in metrocard form, for your suggestions... and I agree w/ 33rd street... I still don't see the (real) purpose for sending V's here into Brooklyn.... it will end up being almost as slow & unreliable as the current R train... Overcrowding happens on the F b/c trains don't run frequent enough; we're not talking about the most reliable of lines here either..... I say the V remains over @ 2nd av.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
E train line Posted July 18, 2009 Share #34 Posted July 18, 2009 V train got to Brooklyn 2 ave is Terminal is major joke it skip East Broadway and Delancey street Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MAA89 Posted July 19, 2009 Share #35 Posted July 19, 2009 WTH, you got a $6 MetroCard?! :mad: But the to Manhattan would be beneficial, although I really think that it should head to Queens. That guy knows what the passengers want, and although right now, money in the MTA is tight, but I think that he can give passengers what they really should deserve. Heck, I might as well propose my idea for service and see if I can get a free MetroCard. :-/ The late night that they are proposing is really the same as your , except it will run only late nights. If you can convince them of the need for a 24-hour 168-WTC local service, then the could be made express in Manhattan. However, the would have to remain express along the Fulton St line (by popular demand), and some service (presumably the ) would have to take in the Lefferts Blvd stations and the 9 local stations in Brooklyn the won't stop at. However, I would like to know how you would handle the following challenge: If the is routed to Lefferts all times (except late nights when the shuttle takes over), and runs local on Fulton St, you would have to provide (at least) rush-hour peak direction trains to/from Lefferts. Given that they will be joined by trains from Far Rockaway and Rockaway Park, and the , after making the local stops on Fulton St, would have to join them at Chambers St (mornings) and at 59th St (evenings), how do you think the express track in Manhattan will cope with so much service? It might become utterly clogged and slow everyone down by a quarter of an hour compared to usual non-rush hour times. Or worse, rush hour headways, already a staggering 13-15 minutes for part of the AM hours from Far Rockaway, might be increased even more. Don't you think the should not run during rush hours and the should run on the local track in Manhattan instead? Now if the runs local in Manhattan during rush hours (as proposed above), late nights (as proposed by Howard Roberts) and weekends (as proposed by you), is there really a point to having a at all (instead of just keeping the local all times). Isn't Howard Roberts essentially suggesting that the is to remain local in Manhattan, operate 168th St to WTC late nights instead of running to Queens, and having the run local in Brooklyn late nights (as it does right now) and dumping Lefferts riders on to the shuttle? I would encourage you to propose the (re)introduction of the , but then if what Roberts says about the late night is already in the pipeline and waiting to be established, then perhaps your wish becomes a moot point. Don't get me wrong: I would love two expresses in Manhattan during the day time, and I desperately want to get on a southbound train without having to worry about which terminus it goes to, but seeing Roberts' letter does make me doubt your plans somewhat. By the way, what a great way to get free MetroCards. Let's keep those ideas coming and we won't have to pay for transit again;) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maserati7200 Posted July 19, 2009 Share #36 Posted July 19, 2009 Nice, to Kings Highway. Hopefully that means express. 2nd Avenue a joke terminal? Don't think so. The would be wasted if extended south of 2nd Avenue. Just for the record, East Broadway is now the lowest used 6th Avenue line station in Manhattan. You're not thinking about the huge benefit for Brooklynites such as myself. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eric B Posted July 19, 2009 Share #37 Posted July 19, 2009 Actually, a to Brooklyn would be better for Park Slope residents, because they would not have to depend on the busy, crowded which often gets hung up in Queens. Not to mention it being good for those using the transfer at Delancey. How many times when I used to wait on 6th Av. Did several empty (V)'s come by, before the delayed, horribly packed . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B35 via Church Posted July 19, 2009 Share #38 Posted July 19, 2009 Nice, to Kings Highway. Hopefully that means express. You're not thinking about the huge benefit for Brooklynites such as myself. I'm a Brooklynite... and I still don't see what huge benefit extending V's here would yield.... As ridership increased along 6th av over the yrs., the F by itself, couldn't handle the load (by load, I mean passengers)... hence, the V was created.... You take more riders off the F in Manhattan & Queens than you would in Manhattan & Brooklyn... The V serves Manhattan & Queens.... There's no need for it (the V) right now to serve the same 3 boroughs the F does (regardless if the F is express & the V is local in Queens)... Continuing on, What does this say about the F in Brooklyn, and the fact the MTA opted to terminate V's in Manhattan, instead of (originally) sending them to Brooklyn... I'm sure you're a logical guy... figure it out. The problem with express service is that Park Slope residents would ultimately kill that plan. You got to remember, Park Slope residents have more clout than any other neighborhood is served along the Brooklyn portion of the line. At least someone else realizes this. Actually, a to Brooklyn would be better for Park Slope residents, because they would not have to depend on the busy, crowded which often gets hung up in Queens. Not to mention it being good for those using the transfer at Delancey. How many times when I used to wait on 6th Av. Did several empty (V)'s come by, before the delayed, horribly packed . You raise a point... That's probably the only upside. (about Delancey).. however, you tinker w/ that F in Brooklyn (esp. in Park Slope) and those ppl. will raise HELL... no question in my mind... anyway, let's take a look at the bigger picture as far as the F is concerned... during the AM rush, there are more F riders coming from Queens than there are from Brooklyn (into Manhattan)....during the PM rush, subsequently, there are more F riders heading towards Queens than there are heading towards Brooklyn... ^^ I know you're not saying this, but I'm still going to make a general statement here... this idea that no one rides the V along it's current route, is ignorant... I think ppl. in general still have this mentality of the V line.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LRG Posted July 19, 2009 Share #39 Posted July 19, 2009 The late night that they are proposing is really the same as your , except it will run only late nights. If you can convince them of the need for a 24-hour 168-WTC local service, then the could be made express in Manhattan. However, the would have to remain express along the Fulton St line (by popular demand), and some service (presumably the ) would have to take in the Lefferts Blvd stations and the 9 local stations in Brooklyn the won't stop at. However, I would like to know how you would handle the following challenge: If the is routed to Lefferts all times (except late nights when the shuttle takes over), and runs local on Fulton St, you would have to provide (at least) rush-hour peak direction trains to/from Lefferts. Given that they will be joined by trains from Far Rockaway and Rockaway Park, and the , after making the local stops on Fulton St, would have to join them at Chambers St (mornings) and at 59th St (evenings), how do you think the express track in Manhattan will cope with so much service? It might become utterly clogged and slow everyone down by a quarter of an hour compared to usual non-rush hour times. Or worse, rush hour headways, already a staggering 13-15 minutes for part of the AM hours from Far Rockaway, might be increased even more. Don't you think the should not run during rush hours and the should run on the local track in Manhattan instead? Now if the runs local in Manhattan during rush hours (as proposed above), late nights (as proposed by Howard Roberts) and weekends (as proposed by you), is there really a point to having a at all (instead of just keeping the local all times). Isn't Howard Roberts essentially suggesting that the is to remain local in Manhattan, operate 168th St to WTC late nights instead of running to Queens, and having the run local in Brooklyn late nights (as it does right now) and dumping Lefferts riders on to the shuttle? I would encourage you to propose the (re)introduction of the , but then if what Roberts says about the late night is already in the pipeline and waiting to be established, then perhaps your wish becomes a moot point. Don't get me wrong: I would love two expresses in Manhattan during the day time, and I desperately want to get on a southbound train without having to worry about which terminus it goes to, but seeing Roberts' letter does make me doubt your plans somewhat. By the way, what a great way to get free MetroCards. Let's keep those ideas coming and we won't have to pay for transit again;) Well the plan only sees extended hours of the until 1 a.m., so the will be inactive until 6 in the morning. But if this is the case, then maybe the may just be unnecessary. But what got me irate was that people thought of making the Lefferts the . That's like having three trains in Brooklyn, which would be pointless. My plan would have almost LESS trains on the road because there would be increased service to Far Rockaway and increased service on the but because the would be Manhattan Express then there will virtually be less trains, and the leftover cars would become the , even if there would need to be 8-car trains. I'm still working on my plan because I feel that Eighth Avenue needs two expresses and two locals and its absurd to let three trains pass before a comes. I'll continue on the train proposal thread as more thoughts develop so stay tuned. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shortline Bus Posted July 19, 2009 Author Share #40 Posted July 19, 2009 We seem divided on the being extended to Brooklyn issue. Personally IMO the if ever extended to Brooklyn via the Culver line, should be rush hours. Other times it could terminate at 2nd Avenue. Until 2002, i lived many years in Coney Island. Sorry 33rd Street but i have seen SRO Manhattan Bound during the AM Rush by 18th Avenue. And that was back in 2002 and "NO that train was not late." I still not sure what should be the Brooklyn express but often even during non rush rours Manhattan Bound the is SRO by the time it reaches Bergen Street. Neighborhoods like Park Slope IMO are 'selffish' and only look at the subway route from their point of view and not from their brothers/sisters boroughwide and citywide. Just my takes.B) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LRG Posted July 19, 2009 Share #41 Posted July 19, 2009 We seem divided on the being extended to Brooklyn issue. Personally IMO the if ever extended to Brooklyn via the Culver line, should be rush hours. Other times it could terminate at 2nd Avenue.Until 2002, i lived many years in Coney Island. Sorry 33rd Street but i have seen SRO Manhattan Bound during the AM Rush by 18th Avenue. And that was back in 2002 and "NO that train was not late." I still not sure what should be the Brooklyn express but often even during non rush rours Manhattan Bound the is SRO by the time it reaches Bergen Street. Neighborhoods like Park Slope IMO are 'selffish' and only look at the subway route from their point of view and not from their brothers/sisters boroughwide and citywide. Just my takes.B) I cannot see the come into Brooklyn during rush hours either. The best take is to make the operate Express in Brooklyn and the take over as the local, but people are going to fight over that too. Face it, Park Slope has no idea what the heck they want. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maserati7200 Posted July 19, 2009 Share #42 Posted July 19, 2009 I cannot see the come into Brooklyn during rush hours either. The best take is to make the operate Express in Brooklyn and the take over as the local, but people are going to fight over that too. Face it, Park Slope has no idea what the heck they want. But Park slope riders want a one seat ride into manhattan. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LRG Posted July 19, 2009 Share #43 Posted July 19, 2009 But Park slope riders want a one seat ride into manhattan. They also wanted Crosstown service, and as a result, the goes to Church Avenue now. But the Culver Viaduct is undergoing a major makeover and soon the express tracks are going to see service. But what line will use it. The can't use it because Crosstown connects with only the upper level of Bergen Street. That means the will be the one that can use it but if Park Slope riders want a one-seat ride to Manhattan, then they may have to take a loss if they live by the local stations. Besides, the runs frequently anyway. It's the I'm worried about.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Y2Julio Posted July 19, 2009 Share #44 Posted July 19, 2009 I cannot see the come into Brooklyn during rush hours either. The best take is to make the operate Express in Brooklyn and the take over as the local, but people are going to fight over that too. Face it, Park Slope has no idea what the heck they want. The can't handle the load that the handles at the stops in Park Slope, plus the 4th Avenue stop is a major transfer point. I don't see any express service in the system that skips a major transfer point. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maserati7200 Posted July 19, 2009 Share #45 Posted July 19, 2009 The can't handle the load that the handles at the stops in Park Slope, plus the 4th Avenue stop is a major transfer point. I don't see any express service in the system that skips a major transfer point. I'll say this once and I'll say it again. 74th street on the is a local stop. It's a major transfer to Roosevelt Ave on the . Should we stop running express service because people will miss out on this connection? If people want the connection, they take the local. Adding express service would be for people who don't want to stop there. Plus on that same stop you mentioned, the and skip it. Should we stop running 4th Ave express service too? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jfkdepot09 Posted July 19, 2009 Share #46 Posted July 19, 2009 Hi Guys. Here a copy i wrote recently to NYCT President Howard Roberts on subway service. please read and reply guys to it. Thanks in Advance. MTA (Metropolitan Transportation Authority) C/O Howard Roberts President New York City Transit 2 Broadway New York, NY, 10004 July 1, 2009 Dear President Roberts and Also Please To Whom It May Concern: As a regular user of the various subway lines in the system, I write to ask for more frequent service on the “C” line including extending late evening service until at least 1230is. The other issue is to extend the “R” line Overnight service to run to 57th Street and 7th Avenue and merge the “Z” and “V” lines which would operate between Forest Hills and Broadway Junction in East New York, Brooklyn weekdays. The purpose of mergering the “V” and “Z” lines is to provide a relief of overcrowding on the nearby “F”, “L” and “A/C” lines. a)First I make this request for the “C” to run later until at least 1230 are because I often have to wait for two or three trains to go through the station during the hours of 11pm-1am when the “A” train becomes are too crowded. It is worse at 34th Street-Penn Station, during events at Madison Square Garden when Knick/Ranger or other MSG shows end. And, because there’s only one bench at the station, I usually have to stand while waiting for a train, even during off hours. B)The Second suggestion is to extend the “R” line overnight service northbound terminal to 57th Street/7th Avenue. Sometimes the “N” can get very crowded especially between Canal Street and 36th Street-Sunset Park. By having the “R” run all night between Manhattan and Brooklyn the “N” could run 24 hours 7 days a week through the Manhattan Bridge, while the “R” operates via the Montague Street Tunnel at all times. This would lessen confusion for Manhattan/Brooklyn passengers waiting for an “R” train overnights and instead wait a long time until figuring out; it operates only as a shuttle in Brooklyn. Also I don’t think it is fair that Bay Ridge area residents have to transfer two times(2x) to connect to the 7th Avenue ‘2’ and Lexington Avenue ‘4’ IRT lines via transfer to “D” and “N” lines. Extending the “R” to Manhattan would solve that issue. There no need to operate the “R” the full route overnights between 95th Street/Bay Ridge and Forest Hills in my view as the “F” as a good alternative route and riders can transfer at 34th Street. However the “R” is needed in running it between Manhattan and Brooklyn would help out the “D” and “N” lines a lot. c)The Third suggestion is to consider merging the “V” and “Z” lines (to be called the “Z”) to relieve overcrowding on the “A/C” “E” “J” and “L” lines. The Brooklyn-Broadway Line is in middle of the fastest growing neighborhoods in all of Brooklyn such as Bushwick and Williamsburg and yet there is not a direct 1-seat train to and from Midtown. In addition the Essex Street transfer station connecting to the Uptown/Queens bound “F” line weekdays and even sometimes on weekends can be standing room. Plus the old abandoned Christie Street tracks still used by non-revenue service cars between the Nassau Street and 6th Avenue/Culver line so the costs should not be too expensive. Thank you for your attention to the matter addressed in this letter. I would appreciate a response to my request. Yours truly, Hudson River Dear hudson river..... Thank you for your reply it was great hearing from someone who rides the daily .....ok let me cut to the chase after 3 months of thinking I will put all these plans in place this will help the city of new york and our great subwayriders this will aslo give some points and it will make feel like I'm doing something at my job. But I need to tell you right now that we our next fiscal year 2011 is near all the plan you have brought to me will be the FIRST THINGS TO BE CUT!!!... and I am also have to tell u that I will BLAME YOU for the idea and the city of new york will hate you and I will be the hero by saying it was a bad idea Thank you for your time.... Sign boss P.s when I do raise the the fare on fiscal year 2011 (which I will ) I will enclosed a 2. 75 metrocard (new fare) you will be one of the first people to get it so have fun railfanning Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Y2Julio Posted July 19, 2009 Share #47 Posted July 19, 2009 I'll say this once and I'll say it again. 74th street on the is a local stop. It's a major transfer to Roosevelt Ave on the . Should we stop running express service because people will miss out on this connection? If people want the connection, they take the local. Adding express service would be for people who don't want to stop there. Plus on that same stop you mentioned, the and skip it. Should we stop running 4th Ave express service too?The runs with enough frequency where it isn't an issue. The does not. Nice try.:tup: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maserati7200 Posted July 19, 2009 Share #48 Posted July 19, 2009 The runs with enough frequency where it isn't an issue. The does not. Nice try.:tup: Yeah but if the were running there that wouldn't be a problem Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B35 via Church Posted July 20, 2009 Share #49 Posted July 20, 2009 If the had the same, or similar frequency as the , that wouldn't be a problem. The can stay terminating in Manhattan right where it does. Still though, there's a difference in stopping express service where it already exists, and introducing an express service where it isn't necessary. Dear hudson river..... Thank you for your reply it was great hearing from someone who rides the daily ..... IAWTP.... and LMAO @ the rest of that rant/reply that came from this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LRG Posted July 20, 2009 Share #50 Posted July 20, 2009 Dear hudson river..... Thank you for your reply it was great hearing from someone who rides the daily .....ok let me cut to the chase after 3 months of thinking I will put all these plans in place this will help the city of new york and our great subwayriders this will aslo give some points and it will make feel like I'm doing something at my job. But I need to tell you right now that we our next fiscal year 2011 is near all the plan you have brought to me will be the FIRST THINGS TO BE CUT!!!... and I am also have to tell u that I will BLAME YOU for the idea and the city of new york will hate you and I will be the hero by saying it was a bad idea Thank you for your time.... Sign boss P.s when I do raise the the fare on fiscal year 2011 (which I will ) I will enclosed a 2. 75 metrocard (new fare) you will be one of the first people to get it so have fun railfanning WTH is up with this sarcasm? Save it, please! It's bad enough Zman did it. We don't need anyone else ruining the integrity of the forums, thank you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.