Department of Subways - Proposals/Ideas

[Deucey]

3 hours ago, Around the Horn said:

I've always thought they should split it into the Northern and Southern lines just to be funny

I read somewhere in a London paper that if Parliament approve rebuilding Camden Town to stop the Central London merge, then one of the branches could be renamed.

[B35 via Church]

4 hours ago, Jova42R said:

Hi all,

I have made a Bronx LRT/Trolley map. I know that street running is seen as not that great (as @Union Tpke, @XcelsiorBoii4888, @engineerboy6561 and @B35 via Church have said), but all of the street running sections (which makes up roughly 75-80% of the system) would run on DEDICATED bus lanes with DEDICATED LRT signals.

Here's the map:

https://drive.google.com/open?id=18NHwrP-Y3xCLjkjnhc0VyHPb8ZthWKZr&usp=sharing

In terms of each line, I think that most of these lines are meant to be subway-underserved area connectors, so BEFORE YOU SAY THAT ONLY 2 LINES CONNECT TO MANHATTAN, REALIZE THAT THIS IS NOT THE MAIN PURPOSE.

I would appreciate any feedback.

Thanks!

@Jova42R

Without even bothering to comment on the merit of any of the individual routes themselves, I'm only going to say that the routes you've drawn up here are far more suitable for bus service, than they ever would be (worth spending one additional red cent on) for light rail service....

[T to Dyre Avenue]

5 hours ago, mrsman said:

You are right that extending  to Downtown Brooklyn, Navy Yard, and Myrtle Ave would not divert any Midtown-bound traffic to the new  as it is now a long route that goes out of the way.  But by doing this, we do free up a lot of capacity on the Williamsburg Bridge Route.  Maybe enough capacity to have a new route, let's call it the orange (K)*.  This train will be an express route from Broadway Junction, stopping at Myrtle/Broadway, and Marcy and then following the old M route to the 6th Ave local and QBL express.  To the extent that it only stops at the longer express platforms along the Broadway Brooklyn el, the train can be full length without platform extensions.  Also, given its express nature, it may be able to pull off a lot of people from other trains, being the most direct Midtown route for anyone coming along the  at Broadway Junction and the new   train at Myrtle/Broadway.

* Or perhaps this can be name  as the old is superflous with the new .

I will say I do like the idea of having a new Jamaica-6th Ave service (the first  /  service). But it would still have to interline with the  in Queens in @Around the Horn’s proposal. And I’m not sure if the Broadway-Brooklyn el express platforms can hold 10 cars, so it’s possible that this K service would still have to run shorter trains than any of the other 6th Avenue or Queens Blvd services. And with only three tracks on the Broadway-Brooklyn el up to Broadway Jct, this K would have to make all local stops in the reverse-peak direction. You’re probably still looking at no more than nine cars per train without platform extensions, though that’s better than the current eight on all of the Eastern Division services.

Edited April 21, 2020 by T to Dyre Avenue

[Around the Horn]

6 hours ago, LaGuardia Link N Tra said:

I get how you want to make the line transition. I’m just confused by how the trains would go underground in the original proposal that @Around the Horn made.

I specifically didn't know where exactly to place the portal, so I figured I would see what kinds of suggestions I would get from people on this thread.

[LGA Link N Train]

29 minutes ago, Around the Horn said:

I specifically didn't know where exactly to place the portal, so I figured I would see what kinds of suggestions I would get from people on this thread.

Ah, I see. Since it started underground, I was thinking that you could potentially separate the Myrtle Avenue Line from the BMT Eastern Division by shifting it underground, or build a portal near the Flatbush Extension. But then I remember reading on Twitter something about a law that made it illegal to build EL’s in Clinton Hill or something along those lines: 

https://codes.findlaw.com/ny/rapid-transit-law/rat-sect-20.html

Here’s the tweet where I found this info:

 

Edited April 21, 2020 by LaGuardia Link N Tra

[bobtehpanda]

4 hours ago, LaGuardia Link N Tra said:

Ah, I see. Since it started underground, I was thinking that you could potentially separate the Myrtle Avenue Line from the BMT Eastern Division by shifting it underground, or build a portal near the Flatbush Extension. But then I remember reading on Twitter something about a law that made it illegal to build EL’s in Clinton Hill or something along those lines: 

https://codes.findlaw.com/ny/rapid-transit-law/rat-sect-20.html

Here’s the tweet where I found this info:

 

So I might be reading this wrong, but that defines the northern point of the exclusion zone as Lexington Av. Myrtle Av is north of that and therefore outside the zone.

[mrsman]

Some of the more recent posts led me to think of a new idea:

1) Realign the Manhattan Bridge tracks so that the 2 Manhattan bound tracks are on the north side of the bridge and the 2 Brooklyn bound tracks are on the south side

2) Redirect the 4 tracks to a new Canal station under Walker Street.  Cross platform transfers in each direction.  The inner tracks will connect to the Broadway express, and the outer tracks will continue west and connect to the 8th Ave express.  The station will still provide transfers to   and the new service along Centre St/Nassau St (see #6)

3) Realign the 8th Ave service.  8th Ave express: QBL express - 53rd Street - 8th Ave express - 4th Ave express - West End/Sea Beach.  8th Ave local:  Washington Heights/Bronx - CPW local - 8th Ave local-Fulton Street Brooklyn-Euclid/Lefferts/Far Rockaway

4) Realign the Broadway service.  Express: 2 Ave-Broadway express-Brighton exp and local.  Local: Astoria-Broadway local-4 Ave local.  Half of the locals will terminate at Whitehall and half will terminate at Bay Ridge. 

5) Realign the 6th Ave service.  Express:  Inwood/Bronx-CPW express-6th Ave express-Williamsburg Bridge-Myrtle or Jamaica.  Local: QBL local- 63rd street-6th Ave local-Culver line

6)  With the remaining capacity along the 4th Ave local, a train line from Delancey/Essex to Bay Ridge via Nassau Street.  Grand street station on the 6th Ave line will close, but service to the area will be accomplished with a stop at Bowery on this line.

Long term, with the extension of SAS, a few changes to the above will be made:

a) SAS service along 2 Ave will run to 2 Ave/Houston and then connect to the Nassau line from Bowery to Broad Street.  Half of SAS will terminate at Broad, and the other half will continue to Bay Ridge.  There will no longer be an in-service connection between Bowery and Delancey/Essex.

b) To make room for the expanded SAS, the Broadway express will go along 63rd street to QBL local instead of upper 2nd Ave.  The 6th Ave local will run with reduced service and will not run north of 57St/6Ave

 

The main idea is that by running the Manhattan Bridge to both 8th Ave and Broadway, and putting in a cross-platform station in Manhattan, we can much more easily remove the DeKalb bottleneck.  Cross-platform Transfers at the new Canal will allow for express service to either Union Square (and Lex services) or W4th (and 6th Ave services).  In turn, this will also allow for more leeway to de-interline the rest of the B division as well.  Canal will also be a connecting point to the future SAS and continue to service  and  .

 

Thoughts?

[Jova42R]

2 hours ago, mrsman said:

Some of the more recent posts led me to think of a new idea:

1) Realign the Manhattan Bridge tracks so that the 2 Manhattan bound tracks are on the north side of the bridge and the 2 Brooklyn bound tracks are on the south side

2) Redirect the 4 tracks to a new Canal station under Walker Street.  Cross platform transfers in each direction.  The inner tracks will connect to the Broadway express, and the outer tracks will continue west and connect to the 8th Ave express.  The station will still provide transfers to   and the new service along Centre St/Nassau St (see #6)

1 and 2) ✅

2 hours ago, mrsman said:

3) Realign the 8th Ave service.  8th Ave express: QBL express - 53rd Street - 8th Ave express - 4th Ave express - West End/Sea Beach.  8th Ave local:  Washington Heights/Bronx - CPW local - 8th Ave local-Fulton Street Brooklyn-Euclid/Lefferts/Far Rockaway

4) Realign the Broadway service.  Express: 2 Ave-Broadway express-Brighton exp and local.  Local: Astoria-Broadway local-4 Ave local.  Half of the locals will terminate at Whitehall and half will terminate at Bay Ridge.

3) ✅

4) Express service is good, however the locals SHOULD NOT terminate at Whitehall. 30TPH service from Astoria-Bway Lcl with CBTC, then locals go to City Hall Lower (), 12TPH. 18TPH continue to Bay Ridge (). The  would then follow this route to Windsor Terrace:

https://drive.google.com/open?id=1POqVjfSA8xoqRuCQTBbCwZvWbBhiNn5Y&usp=sharing

3 hours ago, mrsman said:

5) Realign the 6th Ave service.  Express:  Inwood/Bronx-CPW express-6th Ave express-Williamsburg Bridge-Myrtle or Jamaica.  Local: QBL local- 63rd street-6th Ave local-Culver line

6)  With the remaining capacity along the 4th Ave local, a train line from Delancey/Essex to Bay Ridge via Nassau Street.  Grand street station on the 6th Ave line will close, but service to the area will be accomplished with a stop at Bowery on this line.

5) ✅

6) Grand shouldn't close, so I'd say have SAS run through Grand. Would this Delancey-BR line run through Montague (let's call it the )?

3 hours ago, mrsman said:

Long term, with the extension of SAS, a few changes to the above will be made:

a) SAS service along 2 Ave will run to 2 Ave/Houston and then connect to the Nassau line from Bowery to Broad Street.  Half of SAS will terminate at Broad, and the other half will continue to Bay Ridge.  There will no longer be an in-service connection between Bowery and Delancey/Essex.

b) To make room for the expanded SAS, the Broadway express will go along 63rd street to QBL local instead of upper 2nd Ave.  The 6th Ave local will run with reduced service and will not run north of 57St/6Ave

a) Why not the  be the Delancey to Bowery line?

b) NO NO NO NO NO. NO BROADWAY ON QBL. PLEASE NO. Instead have a lower level and send lower 2 Av trains via a new 79th tunnel to 21 St, then via Astoria Blvd (Northern would be a LRT)

 

That's my feedback!

 

[mrsman]

Thanks for your comments, my ideas tend to be really conservative and look to make actual construction in as few places as possible.  So I don't think along the terms of major extensions, but they certainly can be planned.   

So my short term plans provide for only the construction of the connection from thte 8th Ave express to the Manhattan Bridge, the new cross-transferring station, and yes removing the 6th Ave express from the Manhattan Bridge.  Then, trying to figure out where everything else is supposed to fit in a way that provides as few merges as possible to keep things really streamlined.  The short term plans don't even consider SAS, but makes room for it.  Without SAS and without 6th Ave connection to Manhattan Bridge, there is no purpose for Grand Street.

The Delancey-Bay Ridge line would indeed run through Montague.  This is why I terminate half of the Broadway locals at Whitehall.  My idea is that the Delancey-Bay Ridge line will be there to continue to provide Lower Manhattan access with a transfer for all travelers on the Broadway Brooklyn line.  The line will directly connect to 6th Ave express and Midtown, but the transfer at Delancey to the Delancey-Bay Ridge line will also be available there.  At the same time, having Montague tunnel trains service both the Broadway local and this new line will allow Southern Brooklyn a cross-transfer (at DeKalb or Atlantic) to both sides of Lower Manhattan, west of Broadway along the  lines and east of Broadway along the new  .  Of course, if there is no demand for that , then we can have a Delancey-Broad St shuttle and run all of teh Broadway locals to Bay Ridge.  But I provided the first option, with the idea in mind that the Delancey-Broad line will eventually become part of SAS and that should continue into Brooklyn.

As far as implementing SAS, my idea is to use as much of the existing Nassau line as possible and avoid new digging in Lower Manhattan.  If the Nassau line from Broad St to Bowery is taken over by SAS, is there still a demand for a Bowery-Delancey shuttle?  Maybe given the 4 track nature of the line, it may be possible to still run a line from Delancey to Chambers, which would probably be somewhat valuable for the Broadway Brooklyn line passengers.

Yes, a lot of people don't like the idea of sending Broadway to QBL, but given how much traffic the line has, the trains have to go somewhere.  A Northern Blvd line seems popular here and that may be a good place for those trains to go, but if no extenstion is built, then what?  If SAS is closed off because all of the capacity of upper SAS is used by lower SAS, then we have a situation where either: 1) Broadway expresses go to 63rd, 6th Ave locals terminate at 57/6 and we reduce the number of 6th Ave locals; 2) Broadway expresses terminate at 57/7, 6th Ave locals go to 63rd and we reduce the number of Broadway expresses; or 3) we replicate the pre-SAS pattern of terminating  at 57/7 and having  merge with  with both lines going to Astoria, but necessarily limiting the number of Broadway locals. 

In the end, though, you are probably correct that if we add a 7th Manhattan trunk line (SAS below 63rd) to the exsting 6 trunk lines (8th/6th/Broadway dual lines), we may need a 7th portal (79th-Northern) to the north in addition to the existing 6 portals to the north and east (CPW local, CPW express, 2 Ave, 53rd , 60th, 63rd) -- in order to deinterline and run the infrasturcture at full capacity.  Given the structure of the stations in Lower Manhattan, we can get away with 6 portals to the south( Williamsburg Bridge, Manhattn Bridge N , Manhattan Bridge S*, Rutgers, Cranberry, Montague) , even with 7 trunk lines, since we merge SAS with Broadway local, and having some of those trains terminate at Broad or Whitehall, with the rest joining in the Montague tunnel.  A lot of money can be saved by avoiding a new tunnel to Brooklyn, which I really don't see as being necessary if we can get better usage of the existing bridges and tunnels.  Part of that is to provide better connections to those bridges and tunnels which is what I attempt to do with the 8th Ave connection to the Manhattan Bridge and the subsequent realignments.

*Or under my plan Manhattan Bridge inner and Manhattan Bridge outer

 

[LGA Link N Train]

13 hours ago, bobtehpanda said:

So I might be reading this wrong, but that defines the northern point of the exclusion zone as Lexington Av. Myrtle Av is north of that and therefore outside the zone.

I reread the document today/ I guess you're right since I see no mentioning of Myrtle Avenue. Must've been half asleep when I first read that document. 

Anyways, @Around the Horn, If I were you, I'd put a portal at or near the Flatbush Extension your your proposed 8th-Myrtle Connection. This may seem a bit silly, but I thought otf sending the to Myrtle/Metro in place of your blue  since its already 8 cars, but then realized that decision probably wouldn't help much.

[T to Dyre Avenue]

On 4/20/2020 at 6:21 PM, mrsman said:

You are right that extending  to Downtown Brooklyn, Navy Yard, and Myrtle Ave would not divert any Midtown-bound traffic to the new  as it is now a long route that goes out of the way.  But by doing this, we do free up a lot of capacity on the Williamsburg Bridge Route.  Maybe enough capacity to have a new route, let's call it the orange (K)*.  This train will be an express route from Broadway Junction, stopping at Myrtle/Broadway, and Marcy and then following the old M route to the 6th Ave local and QBL express.  To the extent that it only stops at the longer express platforms along the Broadway Brooklyn el, the train can be full length without platform extensions.  Also, given its express nature, it may be able to pull off a lot of people from other trains, being the most direct Midtown route for anyone coming along the  at Broadway Junction and the new   train at Myrtle/Broadway.

* Or perhaps this can be name  as the old is superflous with the new .

 

23 hours ago, T to Dyre Avenue said:

I will say I do like the idea of having a new Jamaica-6th Ave service (the first  /  service). But it would still have to interline with the  in Queens in @Around the Horn’s proposal. And I’m not sure if the Broadway-Brooklyn el express platforms can hold 10 cars, so it’s possible that this K service would still have to run shorter trains than any of the other 6th Avenue or Queens Blvd services. And with only three tracks on the Broadway-Brooklyn el up to Broadway Jct, this K would have to make all local stops in the reverse-peak direction. You’re probably still looking at no more than nine cars per train without platform extensions, though that’s better than the current eight on all of the Eastern Division services.

But now that I think about it, with the  taking over the Myrtle el, there probably would be capacity for this K service. I think it’s feasible. But maybe it ought to run local so it can pick up additional riders on the inner Broadway-Brooklyn el.

[T to Dyre Avenue]

4 hours ago, LaGuardia Link N Tra said:

I reread the document today/ I guess you're right since I see no mentioning of Myrtle Avenue. Must've been half asleep when I first read that document. 

Anyways, @Around the Horn, If I were you, I'd put a portal at or near the Flatbush Extension your your proposed 8th-Myrtle Connection. This may seem a bit silly, but I thought otf sending the to Myrtle/Metro in place of your blue  since its already 8 cars, but then realized that decision probably wouldn't help much.

And you’d need a replacement for the  on Fulton in Brooklyn.

[LGA Link N Train]

11 hours ago, T to Dyre Avenue said:

And you’d need a replacement for the  on Fulton in Brooklyn.

Yea....

There’s always the option of connecting the Fulton Local Tracks with he Bellmouths at Whitehall but that’ll mean the closure of the transit museum. Not to mention, that’s not what’s being proposed at this current moment.

[Collin]

The transit museum could be relocated somewhere else.  I think there should be an extra service on Fulton as it has 4 tracks but operates at less than 50% capacity.  There was something on Vanshnookenraggen about having the  replace the  as the Fulton local.  The  would run express to Broadway Junction, then connect to the BMT Jamaica Line.  The rationale for this was to speed up service from the outer portion of the Jamaica Line.  It would also serve both lower and midtown Manhattan since you'd just stay on the train to get to midtown.  The  and  would serve the inner portion of the line with one going to Broadway Junction and the other to Metropolitan Ave because that plan also assumed that Second Avenue services would replace the  over the Manhattan Bridge.  The  would become a downtown shuttle between Delancey Street Essex Street and Broad Street, but rush hour service could continue to run via Williamsburg.

I do have several  issues with this idea.  One is that the Nassau Street line would see even lower ridership and it could lead to abandonment.  Another is the fact that the  would be a much slower than the , leading to people crowding the express, and customers at local station being unhappy.

I would rather have a Second Avenue service run via Fulton local all the way to Euclid, with the  running express and taking over Lefferts.  Then the  could run to both sides of the Rockaways, eliminating the need for a full time shuttle.  As for the Jamaica Line, it's certainly a dinosaur and needs improvement.  I'd look at stop consolidation, and a reroute of the line between Broadway Junction and Cypress Hills to eliminate the sharp curves.  The running there could be explored at a later time, and that would also allow for the , possibly changed back to the  to run via Culver local so the  could go express.

[LGA Link N Train]

40 minutes ago, Collin said:

I do have several  issues with this idea.  One is that the Nassau Street line would see even lower ridership and it could lead to abandonment.  Another is the fact that the  would be a much slower than the , leading to people crowding the express, and customers at local station being unhappy.

We can already connect the to the Fulton Local tracks. Personally, I don't like the method that Vanshnookenraggen presented in his "Future of the Second Avenue Subway" blog even though that was not the main point of his article. The way I'd do it is by using the bellmouth's just south of Whitehall Street, run it under state street, then turn it to hit Schermehorn Street so that it could connect with the Transit Museum. The reason I prefer connecting the to Fulton as opposed to the (or SAS) is because it allows for better IND-BMT integration. If the and took over WillyB with the   and a second SAS service going down Brighton and 4th Avenue, then you could have the (or a relabled Nassau Service) run from Essex to Bay Ridge.

As for relocating the Transit Museum, its much easier said than done as there likely aren't any suitable places for one. You could build a new one at Avenue C, but that would be a disservice to those in Alphabet City. Might as well put up live exhibits where ever possible. 

Edited April 22, 2020 by LaGuardia Link N Tra

[JeremiahC99]

1 hour ago, Collin said:

I do have several  issues with this idea.  One is that the Nassau Street line would see even lower ridership and it could lead to abandonment.  Another is the fact that the  would be a much slower than the , leading to people crowding the express, and customers at local station being unhappy.

Nassau Street should not be used for any connection to the Fulton Street Line. Of anything, I would just construct a new tunnel south of Whitehall, using the existing provisions, then enter Brooklyn to connect to Court Street (the museum), then continue along the Fulton Street Local tracks picking up the  route. With another connection to the Jamaica Avenue Line, you can have the  branch off to Jamaica Center, while the  service would take over Euclid Avenue.  service Can move to the express tracks to Lefferts Blvd, while all  train service will be redirected to the Rockaways, which would not only increase service for those residents and Ozone Park and Howard Beach residents, but also finally end the confusion of which  train goes where. 

The  would now operate between Broadway Junction and 95th Street as a replacement for often infrequent and unreliable  route (some of my friends who live along the route have had their fair share of long waits). The  would operate at 12 trains per hour, improving service along 4th Avenue. 

With this, speeds on all trains will increase due to the lack of merge at Hoyt-Schermerhorn, which slows trains between Lafayette Avenue and Jay Street-MetroTech. This also allows for extra service on both local and express tracks, which should reduce waiting times for all riders. In addition, Jamaica Avenue riders would also see a faster trip to Lower Manhattan overall, and through they would still have to transfer to the express to reach Midtown faster, it is of not that the new transfer would now be a cross platform interchange, which would allow for the loads to be redistributed on the express trains rather than have everyone crowd the area near the stairs.

1 hour ago, LaGuardia Link N Tra said:

As for relocating the Transit Museum, its much easier said than done as there likely aren't any suitable places for one. You could build a new one at Avenue C, but that would be a disservice to those in Alphabet City. Might as well put up live exhibits where ever possible. 

There could be a potential solution for that:

Last time I posted a big plan, it involved the Nassau-8th Avenue connection and the new Lower Manhattan connections. In my earlier plan, I had the  to Metropolitan via the new connection and the  continuing to World Trade Center along the existing route. However, due to feedback that there would be reverse branching along the new connections, the plans have been revised. Under the new plan I am making, service to World Trade Center-Chambers Street would be discontinued. In my new plan, both the  and  would be rerouted over the Williamsburg Bridge, with the  replacing  service to Broadway Junction and the  going to Metropolitan Avenue as planned.  service would terminate at Essex Street. The  and  express would continue to service Canal Street and Chambers Street. As a result, this would mean that the World Trade Center station is now freed up for museum space (like Court Street, this station has two tracks and one island platform for the train exhibits). This location could be suitable for the new museum location due to its location near the World Trade Center area (potential for increased patronage) and most of the same lines that stop near the current location also converge over here as well. However, potential drawbacks at this location would be possible pedestrian flow problems, since this site is connected to an existing station, which will continue to receive subway service. Additional evaluation will be needed to determine how to accommodate the rest of the exhibits without interfering with pedestrian operations (the mezzanine to this platform is connected to the rest of the station). 

[Jova42R]

4 hours ago, JeremiahC99 said:

Last time I posted a big plan, it involved the Nassau-8th Avenue connection and the new Lower Manhattan connections. In my earlier plan, I had the  to Metropolitan via the new connection and the  continuing to World Trade Center along the existing route. However, due to feedback that there would be reverse branching along the new connections, the plans have been revised. Under the new plan I am making, service to World Trade Center-Chambers Street would be discontinued. In my new plan, both the  and  would be rerouted over the Williamsburg Bridge, with the  replacing  service to Broadway Junction and the  going to Metropolitan Avenue as planned.  service would terminate at Essex Street. The  and  express would continue to service Canal Street and Chambers Street. As a result, this would mean that the World Trade Center station is now freed up for museum space (like Court Street, this station has two tracks and one island platform for the train exhibits). This location could be suitable for the new museum location due to its location near the World Trade Center area (potential for increased patronage) and most of the same lines that stop near the current location also converge over here as well. However, potential drawbacks at this location would be possible pedestrian flow problems, since this site is connected to an existing station, which will continue to receive subway service. Additional evaluation will be needed to determine how to accommodate the rest of the exhibits without interfering with pedestrian operations (the mezzanine to this platform is connected to the rest of the station). 

 

5 hours ago, LaGuardia Link N Tra said:

As for relocating the Transit Museum, its much easier said than done as there likely aren't any suitable places for one. You could build a new one at Avenue C, but that would be a disservice to those in Alphabet City. Might as well put up live exhibits where ever possible. 

In terms of a WTC museum, I'd just simply block off all the entrances to/from the mezzanine. The one thing that worries me about that, though, is isn't there a direct, one-hallway connection from the  to the downtown ?

[Jova42R]

5 hours ago, LaGuardia Link N Tra said:

We can already connect the to the Fulton Local tracks. Personally, I don't like the method that Vanshnookenraggen presented in his "Future of the Second Avenue Subway" blog even though that was not the main point of his article. The way I'd do it is by using the bellmouth's just south of Whitehall Street, run it under state street, then turn it to hit Schermehorn Street so that it could connect with the Transit Museum. The reason I prefer connecting the to Fulton as opposed to the (or SAS) is because it allows for better IND-BMT integration 

My plan for Broadway service:

 WOODLAWN - WEST BRONX - 2 AV - BWAY EXP - MANHATTAN BR - 4 AV - WEST END - CONEY ISLAND

THROGS NECK - CROSS/WEST BRONX - 2 AV - BWAY EXP - MANHATTAN BR - 4 AV - SEA BEACH - CONEY ISLAND

 ASTORIA - BWAY LCL - 4 AV - BAY RIDGE

 ASTORIA - BWAY LCL - RED HOOK - WINDSOR TERRACE

The  would utilize City Hall Lower (also a possible short-turn for  trains), then run in a new tunnel under Lower Manhattan, stopping at Fulton Center, John St, and Hanover Sq, then in a new underwater tunnel, leaving Manhattan at Broad St, then going under the bay, stopping at Governors Island, and arriving in Red Hook. It would then run down through Red Hook, across the neighborhood, and then in a new tunnel under 10 St then 7 Av to 20th St, where it'd terminate at a 3-track terminal purely for s.  trains would also run 7 days a week.

Thoughts @LaGuardia Link N Tra @darkstar8983 @Biggie @Lex @JeremiahC99?

Map for  here

[JeremiahC99]

1 minute ago, Jova42R said:

 

In terms of a WTC museum, I'd just simply block off all the entrances to/from the mezzanine. The one thing that worries me about that, though, is isn't there a direct, one-hallway connection from the  to the downtown ?

I somehow forgot to take that into account when I came up with the idea, but I’ll have to look into that. What I do see happening is that riders on the  train looking to continue further downtown on the  and  would transfer instead at a new station at Broadway and Broome Street (the new station would have a passageway to the existing Prince Street  and  station) and  and  riders can use Fulton for  and  service downtown so the transfer would be somewhat unnecessary. 

Anyways, at that point, what I could see happening is that the fare areas over by the passageway would be reconfigured to redirect riders to either the  passageway to the express train platform or to the oculus directly. Now I haven’t been back over since the whole stay-at-home order forced me to work from home, but if I do have time when this ends, I’ll take a look to see what the layout is like over there.

[bobtehpanda]

7 hours ago, Collin said:

I do have several  issues with this idea.  One is that the Nassau Street line would see even lower ridership and it could lead to abandonment.

Who gives a shit? The riders have consistently voted with their feet over the years. The peak load point for is Marcy, where everyone just piles on the to go to Midtown.

Quite frankly, if you're looking for a space that could be big enough to hold a Transit Museum, Chambers St, or even the entire Nassau Line, is a pretty good candidate.

[LGA Link N Train]

57 minutes ago, bobtehpanda said:

Quite frankly, if you're looking for a space that could be big enough to hold a Transit Museum, Chambers St, or even the entire Nassau Line, is a pretty good candidate.

I was thinking about this the other day. I was working on a map (which I have deleted since) that worked with the Scenario of slowly abandoning the The Jamaica Line. 
 

Phase 1 - Whitehall-Fulton Connector.  trains would be extended to Euclid Avenue via a New Tunnel.  service will be booted to the Express. A new Junction just past Broadway Junction would be built to connect with Jamaica Avenue and replace the “Fulton EL” portion of the Jamaica line between Cypress Hills and Broadway Junction. The new stops would maintain the names of Van Siclen Avenue, Cleveland Street and Norwood Avenue. The third track along the Jamaica EL would be extended to Pennsylvania Avenue to serve as a non revenue track. A Station on the LIRR Atlantic Line would be built at either Crescent or Logan Street to replace the demolished stations. 

Phase 2- SAS Phase 3 with a Chrystie Street Modification.  Via West End. Arguably, if we only do small modifications to Phase 3 without Changing it up entirely, then I’d say that the  should run from 55th Street to Coney via 4th/West End at 20 TPH with a train every 10-15 minutes running to 125th.  and  Trains run to 125th, both at 12 TPH.  to Williamsburg and the  Eliminated. East New York would be reserved for the  with the  and  using Concourse. 

Phase 2.5 - I’d argue that the Franklin Shuttle should be rebuilt entirely in order to implement a connection with the  and so that there could be a TRUE Brooklyn Crosstown Route from Court Square to Coney Island.  trains would be the Brighton Express and new Interlocking’s will be installed to allow for this New Crosstown route to short turn at Ocean Parkway. 

Phase 3 - A Second Set of SAS Tracks should run from 55th Street to Grand Street then turn under Park Row to connect to Fulton and Broad Street Stations then continue to Bay Ridge. This could be a Reinstated  line and would allow for the complete abandonment of Nassau between Chambers and Bowery. 

- Chambers can become the new Transit Museum

- Canal would be repurposed as an expanded Mezzanine or waiting area for the  and .

- Bowery could be a Second Museum or a Storage Facility for  and  Trains with a new Signal Tower Installed there. 

[Collin]

I like the idea of repurposing Fulton and Broad as Second Avenue stations.  While it doesn't serve as wide of a geographic area, it gives much better connections to the rest of the system.  A renovated Chambers Street station would be perfect for the Transit Museum.  With 4 tracks and Spanish Solution platforms, they could expand the exhibit even more.  Store the rest of the museum fleet in the tunnels between Canal and Essex Street.

For the Jamaica Line redesign, a new underground portion with consolidated stops would greatly speed up service by removing stations and the sharp curves.  Also, it would be much faster to Lower Manhattan, and even midtown via the Fulton express.  I would also design the Norwood Ave station to be a temporary terminal with crossovers so that the new underground portion could operate during weather events that limit service to underground only.

The  being the Fulton local service wouldn't be a problem either.  It would be the same number of stops from Hoyt Schermerhorn as the  to the next station where they have a transfer which is Cortlandt Street/Chambers Street.  Stay on the 2 more stops to Canal Street, and you get a transfer to the  which the  don't have.

[mrsman]

11 hours ago, JeremiahC99 said:

I somehow forgot to take that into account when I came up with the idea, but I’ll have to look into that. What I do see happening is that riders on the  train looking to continue further downtown on the  and  would transfer instead at a new station at Broadway and Broome Street (the new station would have a passageway to the existing Prince Street  and  station) and  and  riders can use Fulton for  and  service downtown so the transfer would be somewhat unnecessary. 

Anyways, at that point, what I could see happening is that the fare areas over by the passageway would be reconfigured to redirect riders to either the  passageway to the express train platform or to the oculus directly. Now I haven’t been back over since the whole stay-at-home order forced me to work from home, but if I do have time when this ends, I’ll take a look to see what the layout is like over there.

Outside of Queens, where  and  are both along QBL, there are very few direct transfers between 8th Ave and Broadway trains.

The other locations are:

42nd street:  to  but it requires the block long tunnel between Port Authority and Times Square

WTC:  to   

and Jay St:   to  

I think that providing a new connection between 8th Ave and Broadway trains, especially if it is in Manhattan north of Canal would be helpful.  There really is no easy way to get between 8th Avenue (local or express) and the Broadway express without taking an intermediate train between the two.*  This also may make it more palatable to separate the 6th Ave and Broadway trains at DeKalb as there would be a new way to connect Broadway express to 8th Avenue.

 

* There still may not be as there is the transfer from  to  at Canal is not cross-platform.

Quote

 

 

[mrsman]

6 hours ago, Collin said:

I like the idea of repurposing Fulton and Broad as Second Avenue stations.  While it doesn't serve as wide of a geographic area, it gives much better connections to the rest of the system.  A renovated Chambers Street station would be perfect for the Transit Museum.  With 4 tracks and Spanish Solution platforms, they could expand the exhibit even more.  Store the rest of the museum fleet in the tunnels between Canal and Essex Street.

For the Jamaica Line redesign, a new underground portion with consolidated stops would greatly speed up service by removing stations and the sharp curves.  Also, it would be much faster to Lower Manhattan, and even midtown via the Fulton express.  I would also design the Norwood Ave station to be a temporary terminal with crossovers so that the new underground portion could operate during weather events that limit service to underground only.

The  being the Fulton local service wouldn't be a problem either.  It would be the same number of stops from Hoyt Schermerhorn as the  to the next station where they have a transfer which is Cortlandt Street/Chambers Street.  Stay on the 2 more stops to Canal Street, and you get a transfer to the  which the  don't have.

If connecting Grand Street to the Nassau line for a future phase of SAS, how far south on the Nassau line does the connection need to be?  I.e. this idea seems to suggest running SAS from Broad to Fulton then Grand and Houston and then further up 2 Ave.  Could the train be routed to also include Chambers, by building the connection between SAS and Nassau line between Chambers and Grand Street.  (It doesn't seem possible to connect Canal on the  with Grand on the SAS as Canal is not far enough south of Grand.)  I do like the idea of repurposing existing lines to avoid new tunneling in Lower Manhattan.  While it would be nice to have a subway to serve Water Street, the walk to the Nassau line from Water Street is very doable.

 

I am also in favor of connecting  to Fulton local, especially if all the new digging is under ground and not under water.  Would it be possible for to separate from  without building a new tunnel under the East River?  It seems that it would be a lot cheaper if the new tunnel was only under solid ground and not the river.  It would also allow for more trains along the Broadway local.

[R10 2952]

Theoretically, the Nassau line could be connected to Grand St through the old bridge tracks north of Chambers, but to avoid merging issues one would probably have to curtail the to Canal Street (which actually used to be a terminal station in the '90s, until they redid the track layout).

But even so, the Nassau Street line has outlived it's usefulness- it duplicates the Lower Manhattan portion of the Lexington line and is too far away from the riverfront to be of any use to the residents there.  The best thing (in a perfect word which doesn't exist, of course) would be if the  replaced it with a new alignment heading north from Montague, up Water/Pearl/SaintJames, and tying in to the Chrystie Line.  Assuming it would be 4 tracks, could probably solve several problems at once.

While I still admire the sheer extensiveness of New York's subway/el system after all these years, lately it's become harder for me to ignore the flawed layouts in some parts; best examples are Lower Manhattan and Downtown Brooklyn- seemed normal when I was a kid, but now I realize they're both complete clusterf**ks when it comes to planning.