Department of Subways - Proposals/Ideas

[Jova42R]

3 minutes ago, Theli11 said:

Broadway - 11th St

And I think that 86/Amsterdam and rather 96 St - Amsterdam with a free transfer to Bway would actually be better than 91/Columbus and 96/Bway

Broadway - 11th St

I'm assuming with an exit to Vernon to serve the Noguchi?

And I think that 86/Amsterdam and rather 96 St - Amsterdam with a free transfer to Bway would actually be better than 91/Columbus and 96/Bway

Why? the mid-90s on Columbus need a station, and since we are already running trains here, it makes sense.

1 minute ago, Around the Horn said:

None of these areas are underserved. They just have buses.

Buses are slow and bogged down. LRT is faster. I know that this proposal is not exactly realistic, and I'd like to know what line you are talking about.

[Jova42R]

6 minutes ago, R10 2952 said:

1. The North Jersey bus network sucks, plain and simple.  Non-linear routes, infinite number of variants for one line, mind-numbingly difficult to get from Newark to points north of Willowbrook (and vice-versa).  Ridiculous crowding at PABT/Midtown because too many buses terminate there when they could be running to GWB/The Heights or destinations in Fort Lee, Weehawken, Hoboken and Jersey City instead.  Also not every route needs an MCI- the 75 from Butler to Newark Penn had no use for them whatsoever, the route carried air.

2. The rail network- too much single tracking in places that should have been upgraded to double years ago, and commuter rail service is spread unevenly throughout the region (service/scheduling/infrastructure).  Not enough effort to restore viable corridors to passenger service- not saying all abandoned lines should be brought back from the dead, just saying it's odd how Jersey City has all those ferries, but you still have to use an overcrowded train station in Hoboken.  Or you listen to politicians in Passaic County talk about restoring at least partial passenger service on the Susquehanna line for 20 years, but nothing ever comes of it. 

Still think NJT has a lot of potential in terms of sheer volume and areas served, just regret that all the potential energy dissipates through inaction.

So you think that my Interurban could work?

[Theli11]

4 minutes ago, Jova42R said:

Broadway - 11th St

I'm assuming with an exit to Vernon to serve the Noguchi?

And I think that 86/Amsterdam and rather 96 St - Amsterdam with a free transfer to Bway would actually be better than 91/Columbus and 96/Bway

Why? the mid-90s on Columbus need a station, and since we are already running trains here, it makes sense.

Mid-90s Columbus has M7 and M11 bus service, 86 St and 96 St stations on CPW, and with this plan they'd also have Amsterdam Av. Why does Mid 90s/Columbus need service? It's fine as it is. And if you want Mid-90s service, you can just make 94 St exits on 96 St/Amsterdam. 

And the exit would've been made anyways. 

8 minutes ago, Jova42R said:

Buses are slow and bogged down. LRT is faster. I know that this proposal is not exactly realistic, and I'd like to know what line you are talking about.

I'll be honest, most buses in Midtown do their job. M31 and M57 buses run 20-25 BPH as you say. I'll restate this: That's 1 bus every 4 minutes. That's not a long wait. If you want better bus service, you might as well go with a busway, but there's no intense need for it.

[Jova42R]

4 minutes ago, Theli11 said:

Mid-90s Columbus has M7 and M11 bus service, 86 St and 96 St stations on CPW, and with this plan they'd also have Amsterdam Av. Why does Mid 90s/Columbus need service? It's fine as it is. And if you want Mid-90s service, you can just make 94 St exits on 96 St/Amsterdam. 

And the exit would've been made anyways. 

But, a direct connection with 96th would be better. That's why I said run diagonally. Thoughts on my N Jersey Interurban?

[bobtehpanda]

2 hours ago, Jova42R said:

Ok, but since the area of 79th and York does need a new station (as @Wallyhorse has said), here’s my plan:

So maybe run the  up 21st to Broadway, then across on Broadway (with Stations at 11th St, North Roosevelt Island and York Av/82nd, then curving up to 86th to meet up with SAS. At the end of the line, After a stop at Central Park West, to connect with the , the  Would run (with a stop at 91st/Columbus), with a connection to . Maybe in a later rendition we could have a branch going up Columbus (stops at 99 and 106) to 110 then connecting to the  at 110.

Thoughts?

If you're taking advice from Wally there's no need to take you seriously either. 79th and York has a short bus ride to SAS or a two-block walk.

[Around the Horn]

25 minutes ago, Jova42R said:

Buses are slow and bogged down. LRT is faster. 

Citation needed. Once again, buses can be sped up by giving them priority over cars. When this stay at home order is over, take a ride on the 14th Street busway, and notice how much faster it's made the buses. Then picture what it would be like to have them everywhere.

25 minutes ago, Jova42R said:

I know that this proposal is not exactly realistic, and I'd like to know what line you are talking about.

Let's go line by line:

Chelsea Branch: within the walk shed of/parallels portions of the  M11 and M20

Riverside South Branch: parallels the M57, M66 and M72

Main Line: within the walk shed of the , not that far from the , parallels the M31 and M57 (and to some extent the Q32 as well)

Northern Line: parallels the Q66 which has already been proposed by the DOT for SBS conversion (LGA branch parallels the Q72)

Cross Brooklyn Line: within the walk shed of the , parallels the B32 and B62

I will let others with more knowledge about Queens than me handle your Queens link line.

 

[Jova42R]

1 minute ago, bobtehpanda said:

If you're taking advice from Wally there's no need to take you seriously either. 79th and York has a short bus ride to SAS or a two-block walk.

See my post on the last page (#9192)

https://www.nyctransitforums.com/topic/48571-department-of-subways-proposalsideas/?do=findComment&comment=1063215

Edited April 9, 2020 by Jova42R

[Theli11]

2 minutes ago, Jova42R said:

But, a direct connection with 96th would be better.

How about walking 3 blocks to the station? Or taking the bus to 96 St/94 St and Columbus 

 

2 minutes ago, Jova42R said:

Thoughts on my N Jersey Interurban?

Yeah, It belongs on the New Jersey Transit side of the forum. 

Edited April 9, 2020 by Theli11
clarification

[bobtehpanda]

1 minute ago, Jova42R said:

See my post on the last page (#9192)

https://www.nyctransitforums.com/topic/48571-department-of-subways-proposalsideas/?do=findComment&comment=1063215

None of Yorkville really needs a new station. 82 and York is even closer to Second Avenue stations!

Waste.of.time.

[Jova42R]

1 minute ago, Around the Horn said:

Citation needed. Once again, buses can be sped up by giving them priority over cars. When this stay at home order is over, take a ride on the 14th Street busway, and notice how much faster it's made the buses. Then picture what it would be like to have them everywhere.

Let's go line by line:

Chelsea Branch: within the walk shed of/parallels portions of the  M11 and M20

Riverside South Branch: parallels the M57, M66 and M72

Main Line: within the walk shed of the , not that far from the , parallels the M31 and M57 (and to some extent the Q32 as well)

Northern Line: parallels the Q66 which has already been proposed by the DOT for SBS conversion (LGA branch parallels the Q72)

Cross Brooklyn Line: within the walk shed of the , parallels the B32 and B62

I will let others with more knowledge about Queens than me handle your Queens link line.

 

Chelsea: If the M12 got converted to BRT, I'd be fine with that

Riverside: So extend the M72 to 61st

Main: I know, meant to be a trunk line (a la Market St in SF)

Northern: I didn't know. If the Q66 becomes BRT, that's ok too,

X Brooklyn: I'll make a new revised map and tag you in the post.

[Jova42R]

2 minutes ago, Theli11 said:

How about walking 3 blocks to the station? Or taking the bus to 96 St/94 St and Columbus 

 

Yeah, It belongs on the New Jersey Transit side of the forum. 

1. As long as you have an exit at 94/Amsterdam, I'm fine with that.

2. Also posted there.

[Jova42R]

1 minute ago, bobtehpanda said:

None of Yorkville really needs a new station. 82 and York is even closer to Second Avenue stations!

Waste.of.time.

Ok, but maybe since the line will already run through there, make a station! 79th-York is 6 blocks from the , and 9 blocks from the . It.needs.a.station.

[Deucey]

Just now, Jova42R said:

Chelsea: If the M12 got converted to BRT, I'd be fine with that

Riverside: So extend the M72 to 61st

Main: I know, meant to be a trunk line (a la Market St in SF)

Northern: I didn't know. If the Q66 becomes BRT, that's ok too,

X Brooklyn: I'll make a new revised map and tag you in the post.

Are you just drawing maps of lines you’d like to have in these transit deserts, or are you doing it based on census info and ridership data?

You’re posting a lot of proposals that people are dissecting as “unnecessary because...” so I wanna make sure there’s some logic beyond “I don’t like not having a train here” behind them.

[Jova42R]

Just now, Deucey said:

Are you just drawing maps of lines you’d like to have in these transit deserts, or are you doing it based on census info and ridership data?

You’re posting a lot of proposals that people are dissecting as “unnecessary because...” so I wanna make sure there’s some logic beyond “I don’t like not having a train here” behind them.

No, correct me if I'm wrong, but I think that most of these areas (West Side excluded) were proposed to have BRT by the . Is that wrong?

[Theli11]

1 minute ago, Jova42R said:

Chelsea: If the M12 got converted to BRT, I'd be fine with that

Riverside: So extend the M72 to 61st

Main: I know, meant to be a trunk line (a la Market St in SF)

Northern: I didn't know. If the Q66 becomes BRT, that's ok too,

X Brooklyn: I'll make a new revised map and tag you in the post.

Cross Brooklyn would still be in the ball park of the  train. But Q66 and M12 can just stay buses? NYC doesn't need to be spending money on a LRT when there's already good bus service there. If you want faster service, propose a busway/bus lane on those lines. if Q66 is being converted to SBS, leave it alone, it's already getting faster, and that line is going to become quicker. M12, does it's job. It serves Chelsea, along with a slew of other buses, like the M14D, M23, and M34 serving the north side of it. M12 goes along the entirety of it and doesn't need faster service. 
In fact, the M8 is a perfect example. If you don't know the M8 runs every 10-15 minutes. It's not frequent at all. Why? Because not a lot of people take it's bus. Not a lot of people need it. So why run every 5 minutes if it'll have low bus service? It doesn't need to be "faster" when it already does it's job without having any extra expenses like extra buses. The M12 isn't a long route, and it runs every 30 minutes, because it has passengers every 30 minutes. The same reason why M14 buses runs around every 5 minutes because people come every 5 minutes. The point is, we shouldn't waste LRT on routes that wouldn't be worth the cost of creating said route. It shouldn't be replacing routes that exist, instead it should be serving (like you said) undeserved communities and taking them to the train/bus faster. Replacing a bus wouldn't be worth it. 

[Deucey]

11 minutes ago, Jova42R said:

No, correct me if I'm wrong, but I think that most of these areas (West Side excluded) were proposed to have BRT by the . Is that wrong?

Is that the criteria you’re using - creating train routes based on where BRT was proposed?

It’s not a bad rationale - most busways built or created are done with the idea of later being upgraded to rail when ridership justifies it (and it could be said that busways are selected because they’re cheaper to do than rail). I just wanna make sure that you’re taken “seriously” as opposed to how the guy who wanted an  extension beyond Far Rockaway “because he had to walk to a bus” was.

[Jova42R]

14 minutes ago, Theli11 said:

Cross Brooklyn would still be in the ball park of the  train. But Q66 and M12 can just stay buses? NYC doesn't need to be spending money on a LRT when there's already good bus service there. If you want faster service, propose a busway/bus lane on those lines. if Q66 is being converted to SBS, leave it alone, it's already getting faster, and that line is going to become quicker. M12, does it's job. It serves Chelsea, along with a slew of other buses, like the M14D, M23, and M34 serving the north side of it. M12 goes along the entirety of it and doesn't need faster service. 
In fact, the M8 is a perfect example. If you don't know the M8 runs every 10-15 minutes. It's not frequent at all. Why? Because not a lot of people take it's bus. Not a lot of people need it. So why run every 5 minutes if it'll have low bus service? It doesn't need to be "faster" when it already does it's job without having any extra expenses like extra buses. The M12 isn't a long route, and it runs every 30 minutes, because it has passengers every 30 minutes. The same reason why M14 buses runs around every 5 minutes because people come every 5 minutes. The point is, we shouldn't waste LRT on routes that wouldn't be worth the cost of creating said route. It shouldn't be replacing routes that exist, instead it should be serving (like you said) undeserved communities and taking them to the train/bus faster. Replacing a bus wouldn't be worth it. 

Even increasing the M12 to 6BPH would be a massive improvement.

if we did do an M72 extension to Riverside South, then I would want at least 8BPH on That route.

I’d be open to having an M8/M12 emerge which would sufficiently serve the needs of that area, But I’m not sure if it’s the best idea.

[Jova42R]

12 minutes ago, Deucey said:

Is that the criteria you’re using - creating train routes based on where BRT was proposed?

It’s not a bad rationale - most busways built or created are done with the idea of later being upgraded to rail when ridership justifies it (and it could be said that busways are selected because they’re cheaper to do than rail). I just wanna make sure that you’re taken “seriously” as opposed to how the guy who wanted an  extension beyond Far Rockaway “because he had to walk to a bus” was.

Not all the time. sometimes i’ll do train routes because currently the only way to get to a CBD (central buisness district) is a slow bus ride (and by slow I mean 1hr or more). And sometimes I’ll propose train routes or even bus routes because they serve transit deserts of which there are quite a few in New York. A great example of both of these is my north jersey Interurban. For the towns on the western end of the route it’s 1 1/2 hours to New York on a bus. And for the towns closer to New York transit desert there are no trains and very infrequent bus service. So that’s basically my rationale for most of my routes.

[bobtehpanda]

59 minutes ago, Jova42R said:

Ok, but maybe since the line will already run through there, make a station! 79th-York is 6 blocks from the , and 9 blocks from the . It.needs.a.station.

It really doesn't. 9 blocks is not a long distance. 6 blocks is not a long distance. When there are real subway deserts where it can take an hour on the bus to get to the subways these priorities are outta whack.

Every stop

• costs a billion dollars and is a billion dollars not spent on literally anything else, like serving those people with the hour long trips to the subway
• wastes the time of people not getting on or off at that stop

[Jova42R]

1 hour ago, bobtehpanda said:

It really doesn't. 9 blocks is not a long distance. 6 blocks is not a long distance. When there are real subway deserts where it can take an hour on the bus to get to the subways these priorities are outta whack.

Every stop

• costs a billion dollars and is a billion dollars not spent on literally anything else, like serving those people with the hour long trips to the subway
• wastes the time of people not getting on or off at that stop

Ok, true. A better option may just be to run the M79 up York or East End to 83rd.

Do you think it'd be better to have a stop at 96th with exits at 94th/Amsterdam or at 90th/91st?

Also, Do you think a 10 St-33 Rd stop could work?

@KK 6 Ave Local I know that both of us proposed a line across at 79th-ish, connecting to Northern. Would a Northern Line be compatible with this?

[B35 via Church]

2 hours ago, Deucey said:

Are you just drawing maps of lines you’d like to have in these transit deserts, or are you doing it based on census info and ridership data?

You’re posting a lot of proposals that people are dissecting as “unnecessary because...” so I wanna make sure there’s some logic beyond “I don’t like not having a train here” behind them.

Neither....

He's drawing maps of lines for not much more than forum acceptance.

He's kicked up enough dust in the bus section & now it appears he's unleashing his wrath here in the subway section.

[Deucey]

31 minutes ago, B35 via Church said:

Neither....

He's drawing maps of lines for not much more than forum acceptance.

He's kicked up enough dust in the bus section & now it appears he's unleashing his wrath here in the subway section.

But it’s a “teachable” thing - refining his thought process from drawing lines to making sure the lines drawn are effective and efficient.

TBH I enjoyed so far these lines on a map he’s done since I think  and other agencies focused expansion too much on density and catchment areas and too little on growth (ie SAS third track scrapped vs  to Hudson Yards). Who’s to say that if these lines were built you wouldn’t see upzoning over the following 10 years next to them?

Could solve the housing shortage we had prior to COVID.

[bobtehpanda]

17 minutes ago, Deucey said:

But it’s a “teachable” thing - refining his thought process from drawing lines to making sure the lines drawn are effective and efficient.

TBH I enjoyed so far these lines on a map he’s done since I think  and other agencies focused expansion too much on density and catchment areas and too little on growth (ie SAS third track scrapped vs  to Hudson Yards). Who’s to say that if these lines were built you wouldn’t see upzoning over the following 10 years next to them?

Could solve the housing shortage we had prior to COVID.

Ah yes, building subway lines for future hipsters rather than the existing, commute-burdened working poor.

It's extremely insulting for people to say things like Yorkville and Roosevelt Island are underserved.

[engineerboy6561]

4 minutes ago, Deucey said:

But it’s a “teachable” thing - refining his thought process from drawing lines to making sure the lines drawn are effective and efficient.

TBH I enjoyed so far these lines on a map he’s done since I think  and other agencies focused expansion too much on density and catchment areas and too little on growth (ie SAS third track scrapped vs  to Hudson Yards). Who’s to say that if these lines were built you wouldn’t see upzoning over the following 10 years next to them?

Could solve the housing shortage we had prior to COVID.

That's basically why I engaged as much as I did on this thread and the other one; I think Jova42 will get a lot better in time (lord knows when I first got on here ten or fifteen years ago I was basically a kid with a crayon, and the feedback I got from people here helped me grow a lot). 

 

2 minutes ago, bobtehpanda said:

Ah yes, building subway lines for future hipsters rather than the existing, commute-burdened working poor.

It's extremely insulting for people to say things like Yorkville and Roosevelt Island are underserved.

You're right; from a perspective of equity in transit our next round of big investments really ought to go into expanding service out onto corridors like Merrick Blvd/Hillside Av/Brewer Blvd in Queens, replacing the Jamaica el, providing relief along the  for Corona residents and running something up 3 Av in the Bronx (with Manhattan service mostly added as a function of connecting those neighborhoods with Manhattan).

[B35 via Church]

1 hour ago, Deucey said:

But it’s a “teachable” thing - refining his thought process from drawing lines to making sure the lines drawn are effective and efficient....

Been down that road already; tried the whole teachable moment thing with the guy (and have seen others attempt it also) & to me, it's apparent that it's falling on deaf ears (up until this point anyway).... It's something to be said when he's going across multiple forums plastering ideas (seemingly whimsically) & @-ing specific people he's seeking feedback from.... I've seen a couple posts now on here, where people are expressing irritation over him doing that....

There is more of a show of ambition towards our acceptance of his ideas, than there is the willing to refine his ideas & learn anything from any commentary received regarding them (which would be reflected in future ideas, which clearly isn't the case with his bus ideas).... He's gotta get out of prioritizing the former.

30 minutes ago, engineerboy6561 said:

That's basically why I engaged as much as I did on this thread and the other one; I think Jova42 will get a lot better in time (lord knows when I first got on here ten or fifteen years ago I was basically a kid with a crayon, and the feedback I got from people here helped me grow a lot).

I hope he does (get better)....

As it stands though, at minimum, it would do him some good if he did a better job of conveying the logic/rationale behind his ideas, upon posting his ideas - instead of just dropping map links, summarizing the ideas in text form, and asking "Thoughts"....

Edited April 10, 2020 by B35 via Church