Jump to content

Fantasy Subway Map 2 (A Geographically Accurate One)


CenSin

Recommended Posts

s5lf83.jpg

 

So basically, this is what it would look like....it is unfinished, but I would extend the A train to Jamaica, full time. The Y train (in Olive) would serve the Rockaways. There would be a transfer to both the Jamaica line and the A train. There is a Utica Av subway terminating at Kings Highway. This would join a rebuilt Broadway line. The purple train is the "8" train mirroring the 7 train but a couple miles south going to the LI border. It would go to Manhattan along 42nd street. I personally think 42st should have 4 tracks and extend to 11th av. There the 7 and 8 trains would run. The 7 train would also extend to Bayside, making only 4 or 5 more stops, though. That would relieve pressure from the bus routes serving Flushing-Main st.

 

Other than that, the map is pretty much the same as it is currently. Other changes: I agree the L train should be extended...that is a no brainer to me. Why? West side access (but along 10th av) and to build a NEW TERMINAL to increase capacity along the L line. People don't realize that the terminal design is a culprit to why the L train can't quickly and easily increase its capacity. The 8th av terminal is not good enough and limits the capacity of the line. I would terminate the L train either at 72st ( 1, 2,3 trains) or probably Columbus Circle (more transfer options).

 

The SAS would only have one line, the "T". It would go into the Bronx along 3rd Av, making only about 10 or 11 stops in the Bx, terminating at Gun Hill Road to help the 2 line. The Bronx would really benefit by it. I would actually not have a 125th street stop, as there is really not much around there. The people who live there live mostly in the housing developments closer to 120th street. Other than that, the 4 train is good enough. It would stop at 116th or 120th st then head straight into the Bronx connecting at 138th street and the 6 line. In lower manhattan, after Grand st (B and D connection), it would head along the J line and terminate at Broad st. The J would probably have to terminate at Chambers st.

Edited by Brooklyn
Link to comment
Share on other sites


s5lf83.jpg

 

So basically, this is what it would look like....it is unfinished, but I would extend the A train to Jamaica, full time. The Y train (in Olive) would serve the Rockaways. There would be a transfer to both the Jamaica line and the A train. There is a Utica Av subway terminating at Kings Highway. This would join a rebuilt Broadway line. The purple train is the "8" train mirroring the 7 train but a couple miles south going to the LI border. It would go to Manhattan along 42nd street. I personally think 42st should have 4 tracks and extend to 11th av. There the 7 and 8 trains would run. The 7 train would also extend to Bayside, making only 4 or 5 more stops, though. That would relieve pressure from the bus routes serving Flushing-Main st.

 

Other than that, the map is pretty much the same as it is currently. Other changes: I agree the L train should be extended...that is a no brainer to me. Why? West side access (but along 10th av) and to build a NEW TERMINAL to increase capacity along the L line. People don't realize that the terminal design is a culprit to why the L train can't quickly and easily increase its capacity. The 8th av terminal is not good enough and limits the capacity of the line. I would terminate the L train either at 72st ( 1, 2,3 trains) or probably Columbus Circle (more transfer options).

 

The SAS would only have one line, the "T". It would go into the Bronx along 3rd Av, making only about 10 or 11 stops in the Bx, terminating at Gun Hill Road to help the 2 line. The Bronx would really benefit by it. I would actually not have a 125th street stop, as there is really not much around there. The people who live there live mostly in the housing developments closer to 120th street. Other than that, the 4 train is good enough. It would stop at 116th or 120th st then head straight into the Bronx connecting at 138th street and the 6 line. In lower manhattan, after Grand st (B and D connection), it would head along the J line and terminate at Broad st. The J would probably have to terminate at Chambers st.

 

Best off creating your own thread.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I was going over the map and came up with this:

2IwGV.jpg

Download New York City Subway Map 2 (With_Annotations).pdf from BayFiles.

 

It's basically my theory of what could be an optimal subway system.

 

Circled are 2 of the most common destinations for commuters: the central business district and the financial district. They're both situated in the southern half of Manhattan and apparently, they are well connected in all directions. The circumferential lines labeled rings 1 to 3 shows a rough approximation of the travel time "topography" to those two destinations. Along the outskirts of rings 2 or 3 are some labeled regions and radial lines are drawn from one or both of the circled regions in Manhattan to those regions; they represent the most direct path from those regions to Manhattan.

 

Ideally, subway routes between the two districts in Manhattan and the outer boroughs should approximate these radial lines with spurs to fill in the gaps. Local routes should end by ring 2 (or a little beyond that). Express routes should end beyond ring 3. Crosstown routes connecting the outer boroughs should approximate the circumferential lines. Express stops and transfers should be put where the radial and circumferential routes intersect. The current subway system approximates the ideal pretty well except:

  • there is no service to the far eastern regions (northeastern Queens, eastern queens, southeastern Queens, eastern Brooklyn) and Staten Island
  • inter-borough connections are rather poor between Bronx and Queens, Queens and Brooklyn, and Brooklyn and Staten Island
  • additional trunk lines are needed to fill in the gaps where nearby trunk lines are at capacity
  • spurs are needed from trunk lines that are not at capacity and have service gaps between itself and the nearest line

 

What I believe needs to be done now is a small expansion in Staten Island, and an extension of several crosstown routes.

 

It's not about changes--I respect your work and creativity.

Actually, I really do want to know what needs to be changed. For example, vanshnookenraggen suggested extending the H to the John F. Kennedy Airport. I went ahead and made the change because it was an obvious idea that I had not put down.

 

s5lf83.jpg

I'm just curious… what tools did you use to produce this? It's a bit off in some areas, but looks good for a rough sketch.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hey Censin I think you should design that Sixth Avenue Line proposal I gave you to serve the western part of Staten Island. The entire West Shore to Tottenville. This is because they are going to develop that area and it would be a hassle to build transit there later when the buildings are there. It would serve the offices, businesses, and homes that would come there soon.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hey Censin I think you should design that Sixth Avenue Line proposal I gave you to serve the western part of Staten Island. The entire West Shore to Tottenville. This is because they are going to develop that area and it would be a hassle to build transit there later when the buildings are there. It would serve the offices, businesses, and homes that would come there soon.

Where would you branch it from? If possible, I'd like to avoid the same situation as the 63 Street connector to Queens Boulevard. It really hurt the speed of trains passing through the area (see "kludge"); that means a connection from the Culver line to the Fort Hamilton Parkway line is out of the question. (And it might not work even it it were connected like that: passengers downstream of Church Avenue get no express service or passengers upstream of Church Avenue get no direct Manhattan service at the local stations since all tracks have a 2-route max constraint in my system.)

 

I'm also running out of letters. We're going to have to be creative with the route nomenclature.

 

Here are the areas without subway service (within reasonable walking distance):

3kMQX.jpg

Edited by CenSin
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The rings add an interesting perspective.

 

I agree that there needs to be more crosstown lines and lines that parallel the rings. That is one of the great failings of our transportation network.

There is no reason why if I live in Bed Stuy that it should take me over an hour and a half to get to say Woodside when it is only less than six miles away. That to me is ridiculous.

 

I firmly believe that at the very least, the "Triboro RX" needs to go up, or at the very minimum from Flatbush to Broadway Junction to help workers get to their jobs easier and take a tremendous amount of pressure off the B6 and B103 routes and also indirect pressure off the B8 and B82. That line could serve as an (S) shuttle train. The ridership would be tremendous.

But if it even went to just Queens blvd/Roosevelt Av, that would be outstanding.

 

Another idea I had was to try to extend the (M) to Queens Blvd/Roosevelt AV from Metropolitan Av...it would be like a loop. To lessen confusion, maybe this could be a seperate line terminating at Myrtle Av (like the current M shuttle) with a different line designation or just a simple (S).

 

The old Rockaway LIRR branch needs to be reactivated despite NIMBY resistance. I love bikes and want more paths, but to convert that into a park/path seems ridiculous and a waste of infrastructure. People don't account for future growth...in 30 or so years, the population might double.

 

Great stuff CeeSin.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The rings add an interesting perspective.

 

I agree that there needs to be more crosstown lines and lines that parallel the rings. That is one of the great failings of our transportation network.

There is no reason why if I live in Bed Stuy that it should take me over an hour and a half to get to say Woodside when it is only less than six miles away. That to me is ridiculous.

 

I firmly believe that at the very least, the "Triboro RX" needs to go up, or at the very minimum from Flatbush to Broadway Junction to help workers get to their jobs easier and take a tremendous amount of pressure off the B6 and B103 routes and also indirect pressure off the B8 and B82. That line could serve as an (S) shuttle train. The ridership would be tremendous.

But if it even went to just Queens blvd/Roosevelt Av, that would be outstanding.

 

Another idea I had was to try to extend the (M) to Queens Blvd/Roosevelt AV from Metropolitan Av...it would be like a loop. To lessen confusion, maybe this could be a seperate line terminating at Myrtle Av (like the current M shuttle) with a different line designation or just a simple (S).

 

The old Rockaway LIRR branch needs to be reactivated despite NIMBY resistance. I love bikes and want more paths, but to convert that into a park/path seems ridiculous and a waste of infrastructure. People don't account for future growth...in 30 or so years, the population might double.

 

Great stuff CeeSin.

 

We don't want more (S)'s we want more full subway lines to serve the people that need the service. We need less (S)'s more subway lines like what Censin is trying to point out.

 

Here. Create a Sixth Avenue Local (I) train that would run from LaGuardia Airport with the (W) where it would connect with the 63rd Street Tunnel. It would run as a local along Sixth Avenue and branch off south of the Broadway Lafayette Street Station and it would follow the Second Avenue Subway all the way to Staten Island before continuing downwards to Tottenville. That would create a West Shore Line.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Don't worry about him, that looks like a very good design.

 

I appreciate that. Thank you very much.

 

CeeSin, I also love the idea of the (4) going to Broadway Junction. I always thought Utica Av was an odd terminal....but then again, that also might put tremendous strain on the 4 train. I would imagine that by the time a Woodlawn Av (4) train left Utica Avenue, it would probably already be packed!!

 

I will put up my Manhattan rough sketch soon....there is nothing different from the system now except I extended the L train to Columbus Circle and drew the SAS....My SAS is almost identical to yours except a few stations are different and I have the (T) going along the (J) to Broad St in Lower Manhattan. I thought it imperative that this train stop at the Fulton St station to take pressure off the 4 and 5 trains since this is a major transfer point. I think it also imperative that it goes to the Bronx and make connections at The Hub (3rd av 149th st) and 3av 138th st. St Barnabas could use better transportation. So could some (2) riders...The T goes to the Bronx and terminates at Gun Hill Rd on the (2). I do not have an East Bronx Branch.

 

This is a radical idea, but for the Lexington Av line, I always thought the (6) train should serve the entire length of Manhattan (24/7) going down to Bowling Green, making stops at Wall St, Fulton St and Bowling Green, but ON ITS OWN TRACKS. It would loop around Bowling Green. I always thought this would help the (4) and (5) trains BIG TIME. I don't know if this can be done, but it's just a thought.

 

I also extended the E train past WTC to stop at City Hall (for transfers to the 4, 5,6 J and soon to be T train), Chatham Square (Chinatown) and end at East Broadway on the (F). You would not believe how difficult it is for people in that part of Manhattan to get to City Hall and the West side other than relying on the M22 and M9 buses, which can be unreliable. This would also take pressure off the (A) and (C) lines and give people more transfer points to the 8th av line in case of emergencies and/or reroutes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I appreciate that. Thank you very much.

 

CeeSin, I also love the idea of the (4) going to Broadway Junction. I always thought Utica Av was an odd terminal....but then again, that also might put tremendous strain on the 4 train. I would imagine that by the time a Woodlawn Av (4) train left Utica Avenue, it would probably already be packed!!

 

I will put up my Manhattan rough sketch soon....there is nothing different from the system now except I extended the L train to Columbus Circle and drew the SAS....My SAS is almost identical to yours except a few stations are different and I have the (T) going along the (J) to Broad St in Lower Manhattan. I thought it imperative that this train stop at the Fulton St station to take pressure off the 4 and 5 trains since this is a major transfer point. I think it also imperative that it goes to the Bronx and make connections at The Hub (3rd av 149th st) and 3av 138th st. St Barnabas could use better transportation. So could some (2) riders...The T goes to the Bronx and terminates at Gun Hill Rd on the (2). I do not have an East Bronx Branch.

 

This is a radical idea, but for the Lexington Av line, I always thought the (6) train should serve the entire length of Manhattan (24/7) going down to Bowling Green, making stops at Wall St, Fulton St and Bowling Green, but ON ITS OWN TRACKS. It would loop around Bowling Green. I always thought this would help the (4) and (5) trains BIG TIME. I don't know if this can be done, but it's just a thought.

 

I also extended the E train past WTC to stop at City Hall (for transfers to the 4, 5,6 J and soon to be T train), Chatham Square (Chinatown) and end at East Broadway on the (F). You would not believe how difficult it is for people in that part of Manhattan to get to City Hall and the West side other than relying on the M22 and M9 buses, which can be unreliable. This would also take pressure off the (A) and (C) lines and give people more transfer points to the 8th av line in case of emergencies and/or reroutes.

 

A suggestion why don't you just make the (T) run somewhere into Brooklyn? There is a lot of room for improvement in Brooklyn. Red Hook is an example.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A suggestion why don't you just make the (T) run somewhere into Brooklyn? There is a lot of room for improvement in Brooklyn. Red Hook is an example.

 

I didn't see the need. Red Hook is an interesting neighborhood. With its proximity to the Battery Tunnel, I always thought a bus route terminating in Lower Manhattan would have been excellent....a modified B61 route going along Van Brunt st (terminating at the Ikea). It would be a nice short and sweet route--easily managed and simple. It would be 25 minutes TOPS from IKEA into Lower Manhattan where I used to work. People who live in the Hook face a transportation NIGHTMARE getting into manhattan--and the funny thing is that Manhattan is so terribly close.

 

This is a little off topic, but I thought the B71 should have been kept and extended into Lower Manhattan as well. Park Slope and Carroll Garden residents would have screamed for joy. So would some Crown Heights residents. That would have been a super route. I believe the MTA was considerding doing this at one point.

 

For me, I like keeping things simple and using existing infrastructure. Both routes would have been heavily used, no doubt.

 

However, if the (T) were hypothetically extended into Brooklyn, I would have it go along 4th av as a local to 59th St and have it terminate at 8th avenue on the (N) line. This would help connect the Chinatowns in Manhattan and Brooklyn, take tremendous pressure off the (R) train in Brooklyn and provide (A)(C)(F) riders another way to get to the East Side of Manhattan (at Metrotech --that transfer was LONG OVERDUE and at 4th Avenue for the (F) and (G). This would also provide another connection point to the Lexington Av line at the Atlantic Av station. The (D) and (N) trains would also indirectly benefit as well.

 

This will also help tremendously with any service changes with the Lex line or 6th Av lines. It gives the MTA more flexibility and riders way more options.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But I ultimately think for the (T) to relieve the most pressure from the Lex line, it MUST stop at Fulton St in Manhattan and it must stop at The Hub in the Bronx and at 3rd Av-138 st for the (6). The (T) should go into the Bronx.

Brooklyn isn't necessarily a priority for this line, IMO, BUT, if it did, it must stop at Jay St Metrotech for the (A)(C)(F) and at Atlantic Center FOR SURE. That would maximize this line's effectiveness IMO.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Another idea I had was to try to extend the (M) to Queens Blvd/Roosevelt AV from Metropolitan Av...it would be like a loop. To lessen confusion, maybe this could be a seperate line terminating at Myrtle Av (like the current M shuttle) with a different line designation or just a simple (S).

The (M) might be difficult to extend from its current terminus. I've been there once, but there's a massive cemetery sitting right outside the station; it has no expansion potential north. Previous plans probably intended to have the Myrtle Avenue line demolished and extended towards the Rockaway Beach branch.

 

The old Rockaway LIRR branch needs to be reactivated despite NIMBY resistance. I love bikes and want more paths, but to convert that into a park/path seems ridiculous and a waste of infrastructure. People don't account for future growth...in 30 or so years, the population might double.

 

Great stuff CeeSin.

NIMBYs will be the great bane of progress in America, but having their support instead of trudging forward despite their objections would be a better way to go forward. These people are not simply against the hardships of having construction right in their backward, but are (for lack of a better word) just ignorant; the importance of efficient transportation is highly underestimated in this nation.

 

We don't want more (S)'s we want more full subway lines to serve the people that need the service. We need less (S)'s more subway lines like what Censin is trying to point out.

I think he meant to say that these lines are best built in phases to make the costs palatable to whomever pays for this. And these short segments will likely start out as shuttles since we don't want these lines connecting to other lines and jamming them with more traffic. The Broadway line connecting to the 2 Avenue line is an exception since northbound traffic needed another outlet to terminate its traffic.

 

The rings add an interesting perspective.

 

 

 

I agree that there needs to be more crosstown lines and lines that parallel the rings. That is one of the great failings of our transportation network.

 

There is no reason why if I live in Bed Stuy that it should take me over an hour and a half to get to say Woodside when it is only less than six miles away. That to me is ridiculous.

 

 

 

I firmly believe that at the very least, the "Triboro RX" needs to go up, or at the very minimum from Flatbush to Broadway Junction to help workers get to their jobs easier and take a tremendous amount of pressure off the B6 and B103 routes and also indirect pressure off the B8 and B82. That line could serve as an
(S)
shuttle train. The ridership would be tremendous.

 

But if it even went to just Queens blvd/Roosevelt Av, that would be outstanding.

 

 

Here. Create a Sixth Avenue Local (I) train that would run from LaGuardia Airport with the (W) where it would connect with the 63rd Street Tunnel. It would run as a local along Sixth Avenue and branch off south of the Broadway Lafayette Street Station and it would follow the Second Avenue Subway all the way to Staten Island before continuing downwards to Tottenville. That would create a West Shore Line.

How would your track connections look? Both the 2 Avenue line and 6 Avenue line have a lot of switches and connecting tunnels in the area. I think it'd reduce efficiency at both ends of 6 Avenue.

 

I appreciate that. Thank you very much.

 

CeeSin, I also love the idea of the (4) going to Broadway Junction. I always thought Utica Av was an odd terminal....but then again, that also might put tremendous strain on the 4 train. I would imagine that by the time a Woodlawn Av (4) train left Utica Avenue, it would probably already be packed!!

Trains from Utica Avenue are said to be packed before even leaving the terminal. However, there are enough new lines and extensions in the area to divert many of the riders—riders who would have taken the (4) to Atlantic Avenue or Fulton Street to transfer—away.

 

I will put up my Manhattan rough sketch soon....there is nothing different from the system now except I extended the L train to Columbus Circle and drew the SAS....My SAS is almost identical to yours except a few stations are different and I have the (T) going along the (J) to Broad St in Lower Manhattan. I thought it imperative that this train stop at the Fulton St station to take pressure off the 4 and 5 trains since this is a major transfer point. I think it also imperative that it goes to the Bronx and make connections at The Hub (3rd av 149th st) and 3av 138th st. St Barnabas could use better transportation. So could some (2) riders...The T goes to the Bronx and terminates at Gun Hill Rd on the (2). I do not have an East Bronx Branch.

That pretty much locks the 2 Avenue line to using the Montague Street tunnel though. :\

 

This is a radical idea, but for the Lexington Av line, I always thought the (6) train should serve the entire length of Manhattan (24/7) going down to Bowling Green, making stops at Wall St, Fulton St and Bowling Green, but ON ITS OWN TRACKS. It would loop around Bowling Green. I always thought this would help the (4) and (5) trains BIG TIME. I don't know if this can be done, but it's just a thought.

It could be done. I believe I've seen other (very detailed) plans where the (6) were connected to PATH to the World Trade Center.

 

I also extended the E train past WTC to stop at City Hall (for transfers to the 4, 5,6 J and soon to be T train), Chatham Square (Chinatown) and end at East Broadway on the (F). You would not believe how difficult it is for people in that part of Manhattan to get to City Hall and the West side other than relying on the M22 and M9 buses, which can be unreliable. This would also take pressure off the (A) and (C) lines and give people more transfer points to the 8th av line in case of emergencies and/or reroutes.

The World Trade Center station ends right before the Broadway line's curve onto Church Street. You'd have to do some creative engineering in that area given that were are 4 other tunnels in the vicinity.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

How would your track connections look? Both the 2 Avenue line and 6 Avenue line have a lot of switches and connecting tunnels in the area. I think it'd reduce efficiency at both ends of 6 Avenue.

 

Two tracks will come off the local tracks east of the Broadway-Lafayette Street Station, and runs underneath the Sixth Avenue Tracks, once it get's close to the proximity of Houston Street it turns south and merges with the Second Avenue Subway.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Two tracks will come off the local tracks east of the Broadway-Lafayette Street Station, and runs underneath the Sixth Avenue Tracks, once it get's close to the proximity of Houston Street it turns south and merges with the Second Avenue Subway.

How about using the (K)…? The (K) and (C) are the only routes using the 8 Avenue local tracks (the (E) is express), and it's not doing much anyway. 8 Avenue is already quite efficient this way too, so a switch somewhere along the Worth Street branch from the local tracks wouldn't hurt this efficiency much; World Trade Center would be closed and there would still be only two merge points along the entire length of local tracks. Both the 2 Avenue and 8 Avenue branches into Staten Island would have connections to 6 Avenue anyway.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Good points, CenSin.

 

Yes, if the T went into Brooklyn, I would have it use the Montague St tunnel with the R train.

 

However, I just wanted it to terminate it at Broad st. Getting it into Fulton St was most important to me. So I don't plan for it to use the tunnel into Brooklyn. I was just answering his hypothetical.

 

I know about the (M) past Metropolitan. It would be tough, but I think feasible. It would give Queens Blvd more options in case the line got rained out and shut down. At least people wouldn't be totally stuck and would have some way to get home. Also Brooklynites would have another way to get to Queens.

 

You are right about (4) trains being crowded before leaving Utica--that's because of people leaving the (3) from Brownsville and East NY. Also you have people living along that area (obviously, lol). Another reason is people from Canarsie transferring from the B17 bus, not to mention people from the eastern portion of East Flatbush along the B46 routes. The B12 and B14 also contributes more people from the Ville and East NY. Some of them could take the (3), by why wait for a unreliable local when they can get a very reliable and express (4) at Utica. In this light, extending the (4) to the Junction actually makes a lot of sense, making a couple stops along the way at Ralph and Rockaway avs. Good call on that.

 

I agree on the NIMBYs....you're preaching to the choir here.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

How about using the (K)…? The (K) and (C) are the only routes using the 8 Avenue local tracks (the (E) is express), and it's not doing much anyway. 8 Avenue is already quite efficient this way too, so a switch somewhere along the Worth Street branch from the local tracks wouldn't hurt this efficiency much; World Trade Center would be closed and there would still be only two merge points along the entire length of local tracks. Both the 2 Avenue and 8 Avenue branches into Staten Island would have connections to 6 Avenue anyway.

 

Well the World Trade Center station isn't really useful since Chambers Street (A)(C) is right nearby. I think it might work.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Good points, CenSin.

 

Yes, if the T went into Brooklyn, I would have it use the Montague St tunnel with the R train.

 

However, I just wanted it to terminate it at Broad st. Getting it into Fulton St was most important to me. So I don't plan for it to use the tunnel into Brooklyn. I was just answering his hypothetical.

Different philosophies, but something I would've done too for cost-savings and transfer opportunities. Now I know the MTA considered the Nassau Street connection in its studies but ultimately chose the more expensive full build down Water Street. I don't recall the reason behind the choice, but I'm sure "difficulty making the connection" wasn't something that would alone convince the MTA to make an obviously more expensive choice.

 

I know about the (M) past Metropolitan. It would be tough, but I think feasible. It would give Queens Blvd more options in case the line got rained out and shut down. At least people wouldn't be totally stuck and would have some way to get home. Also Brooklynites would have another way to get to Queens.

Without demolishing too much of the Myrtle Avenue line, connecting it to the TriboroRX line already cutting through the centenary would be another option. The Myrtle Avenue line is pretty close to the TriboroRX form Fresh Pond Road to Metropolitan Avenue.

 

Well the World Trade Center station isn't really useful since Chambers Street (A)(C) is right nearby. I think it might work.

I'm going to have to think this through. Staten Island is lacking in direct Manhattan service, with the only line from 2 Avenue providing service to the East side of Manhattan. Including 8 Avenue would even it out, but a combination of 8 Avenue, Broadway, and 2 Avenue service would make service to Staten Island well-rounded.

 

Broadway could connect to the "Battery Tunnel" (I've yet to name that parallel tunnel) from Rector Street. We'd send the (W) there and move the (M) to Brighton as a local—not exactly desirable, but what other train would you move there? The (K) could branch off from Worth Street as mentioned before, and Staten Island would have access to both sides of Manhattan and along the middle as well as intra-borough service, crosstown service, and a connection to the rest of Brooklyn and Queens via the X.

Edited by CenSin
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I didn't see the need. Red Hook is an interesting neighborhood. With its proximity to the Battery Tunnel, I always thought a bus route terminating in Lower Manhattan would have been excellent....a modified B61 route going along Van Brunt st (terminating at the Ikea). It would be a nice short and sweet route--easily managed and simple. It would be 25 minutes TOPS from IKEA into Lower Manhattan where I used to work. People who live in the Hook face a transportation NIGHTMARE getting into manhattan--and the funny thing is that Manhattan is so terribly close.

 

This is a little off topic, but I thought the B71 should have been kept and extended into Lower Manhattan as well. Park Slope and Carroll Garden residents would have screamed for joy. So would some Crown Heights residents. That would have been a super route. I believe the MTA was considerding doing this at one point.

 

For me, I like keeping things simple and using existing infrastructure. Both routes would have been heavily used, no doubt.

 

However, if the (T) were hypothetically extended into Brooklyn, I would have it go along 4th av as a local to 59th St and have it terminate at 8th avenue on the (N) line. This would help connect the Chinatowns in Manhattan and Brooklyn, take tremendous pressure off the (R) train in Brooklyn and provide (A)(C)(F) riders another way to get to the East Side of Manhattan (at Metrotech --that transfer was LONG OVERDUE and at 4th Avenue for the (F) and (G). This would also provide another connection point to the Lexington Av line at the Atlantic Av station. The (D) and (N) trains would also indirectly benefit as well.

 

This will also help tremendously with any service changes with the Lex line or 6th Av lines. It gives the MTA more flexibility and riders way more options.

The T train should not run in Brooklyn it should just be a local between the BK and BX just like the 1 train. There should be a express train that would go from the SAS to Brooklyn terminating at Kings Plaza. The ''H'' as iI shall call it would start a Kings Plaza head on down Uticca ave to Second ave in manhattan and up second ave into the the bronx.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Different philosophies, but something I would've done too for cost-savings and transfer opportunities. Now I know the MTA considered the Nassau Street connection in its studies but ultimately chose the more expensive full build down Water Street. I don't recall the reason behind the choice, but I'm sure "difficulty making the connection" wasn't something that would alone convince the MTA to make an obviously more expensive choice.

 

 

 

Sometimes you just wonder what the MTA is thinking. I really don't know how that line is going to shift that much ridership from the Lex line if it does not stop at a MAJOR transfer point like Fulton st. The way they are planning it, it is just an underground quicker M15 route--nothing wrong with that, but a huge portion of Lex line riders are coming from Brooklyn and the Bronx. A lot are coming from Grand Central from Metro North. With the LIRR possibly coming into GC too, the Lex line will never really see relief. This is why I argued for the train to make those two transfer points in the South Bronx and the one in Lower Manhattan. Some clever engineering would have possibly called for the train to make a stop closer to Grand Central. In any case, I am still glad the line is being built. M15 riders will scream in rejoice as they see commutes being slashed to a fraction of what it is now. The M15 can be a pain in the behind.

 

But this is just like the 7 train extension. How can you extend it and not put a stop on 10th Av to serve Hell's Kitchen and take pressure off the M42 bus? Just doesn't make sense to me...but that's the MTA.

 

Good idea CenSin linking the (M) to a possible future Triboro to go to Queens Blvd.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 9 years later...

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.