Department of Subways - Proposals/Ideas

[ABCDEFGJLMNQRSSSWZ]

2 hours ago, TMC said:

My suggestion wasn’t along the entire corridor. My take is that the northern portion of the RoW is extremely meh for any kind of rail service. The benefit of coverage on that route doesn’t pan out, it’s mostly missing-middle and SFH, with auto-oriented commercial zones. I just prefer abandoning the entire cut-off and reactivating LIRR service to Rockaway Park from its current Far Rockaway terminus, a route that is only 4 minutes slower to Midtown on current schedules, and could definitely be made faster.

I was just looking at Google Maps and it seems like there's a pretty robust development going up in the small space between the end of the at Far Rockaway and the LIRR. Obviously taking eminent domain of this new complex is out of the question, so would you propose a tunnel or somehow going around the complex? That starts to be pretty expensive imo, especially considering how low of a priority this would be. 

[TMC]

1 hour ago, ABCDEFGJLMNQRSSSWZ said:

I was just looking at Google Maps and it seems like there's a pretty robust development going up in the small space between the end of the at Far Rockaway and the LIRR. Obviously taking eminent domain of this new complex is out of the question, so would you propose a tunnel or somehow going around the complex? That starts to be pretty expensive imo, especially considering how low of a priority this would be. 

Tunnel, now they get a free transit hub in a sense.

[ABCDEFGJLMNQRSSSWZ]

18 minutes ago, TMC said:

Tunnel, now they get a free transit hub in a sense.

Yeah looking further it seems like it'd be pretty hard to make it "go around" the complex just the way the streets are in that area. If it weren't for the fact they'd need to build a whole new tunnel, I think it'd be an idea worth exploring on the MTA's part, but rn there are tunnels that are far more important imo.

[Theli11]

5 hours ago, TMC said:

My suggestion wasn’t along the entire corridor. My take is that the northern portion of the RoW is extremely meh for any kind of rail service. The benefit of coverage on that route doesn’t pan out, it’s mostly missing-middle and SFH, with auto-oriented commercial zones. I just prefer abandoning the entire cut-off and reactivating LIRR service to Rockaway Park from its current Far Rockaway terminus, a route that is only 4 minutes slower to Midtown on current schedules, and could definitely be made faster.

Wouldn't this also affect Students who go to school anywhere along the line? I know a lot of Rockaway kids use the train to get to school in Brooklyn and shorter trips to the mainland would be a lot harder to make if you took the train off of the Rockaway at all. These aren't just midtown commuters going to the Rockaways it's also people who live or go to school near City Line, Ozone Park, and Broadway Junction (and transfer to the or trains). Far Rockaway is still apart of Queens and at the end of the day, they also might have students who need to make shorter trips and the LIRR doesn't really provide that for students. 

[Lex]

4 hours ago, Theli11 said:

Wouldn't this also affect Students who go to school anywhere along the line? I know a lot of Rockaway kids use the train to get to school in Brooklyn and shorter trips to the mainland would be a lot harder to make if you took the train off of the Rockaway at all. These aren't just midtown commuters going to the Rockaways it's also people who live or go to school near City Line, Ozone Park, and Broadway Junction (and transfer to the or trains). Far Rockaway is still apart of Queens and at the end of the day, they also might have students who need to make shorter trips and the LIRR doesn't really provide that for students. 

That requires thinking there's more to NYC than a subsection of a subsection of Manhattan.

[Lawrence St]

18 hours ago, ABCDEFGJLMNQRSSSWZ said:

I was just looking at Google Maps and it seems like there's a pretty robust development going up in the small space between the end of the at Far Rockaway and the LIRR. Obviously taking eminent domain of this new complex is out of the question, so would you propose a tunnel or somehow going around the complex? That starts to be pretty expensive imo, especially considering how low of a priority this would be. 

Yeah no, eminent domain.

We really need to stop this mentality (oh there’s a building there, nvm!). If they were to ever create a new branch off WPR where the old 180th St platform is, that building they built on the ROW has to eminent domained.

which brings up another question, why does the city continue to allow new buildings to prop up on ROW’s when we need all the rail infrastructure we can get?

[Via Garibaldi 8]

4 hours ago, Lawrence St said:

Yeah no, eminent domain.

We really need to stop this mentality (oh there’s a building there, nvm!). If they were to ever create a new branch off WPR where the old 180th St platform is, that building they built on the ROW has to eminent domained.

which brings up another question, why does the city continue to allow new buildings to prop up on ROW’s when we need all the rail infrastructure we can get?

What a ridiculous comment.  In NYC we are in a housing crisis, so we need all of the housing we can get and we need to keep what we have.  Eminent domain is not something that is just thrown around and in the past it has been used to destroy entire neighborhoods that have never recovered.  You get a pass because you are young, so obviously you don't see the big picture, but still.

----

On another note, quite a few people don't know how to use eminent domain correctly. in this thread.  There is no such thing as "eminent domained". lol 

Edited February 3, 2023 by Via Garibaldi 8

[TMC]

On 2/2/2023 at 11:35 PM, Theli11 said:

Wouldn't this also affect Students who go to school anywhere along the line?

They could just take the bus up to the Liberty Ave El, I don't see them as a priority for any reorganization of part of the system, it's not a hefty chunk of ridership to be worth bending over backwards for.

[Kamen Rider]

Every last rider is worth bending over backwards for.

The entire reason we have the system is to provide people with mobility they might not otherwise have. To tell someone outright they don’t matter because of where they choose to live… that’s just all kinds of wrong. 
 

we do not exist to be optimized and economical. We exist to provide a service to everyone who wants it.

if these people want us to be there, then we should be there. 

[TMC]

6 hours ago, Kamen Rider said:

if these people want us to be there, then we should be there.

Vibes-based transportation planning™.

[ABCDEFGJLMNQRSSSWZ]

As of today, these are the top 5 most important new Subways I think we need to focus on:

1. A full length Second Avenue Subway. It doesn't have to be built with 4 tracks right away or go into the Bronx or Brooklyn yet, but I hope the MTA will do a better job with provisions in later phases so this is possible down the road say if ridership begins to demand a new train in the Bronx or smtg. I actually really support the idea of the 2nd Av Subway turning and going across 125th Street as the busses are crazy there and there's not any subways that connect East-West above midtown. I was glad the MTA at least seems mildly interested in the idea now.

2. Utica Av (via train extension).  This area is a transit desert. Along with this, I would try to work on Rogers junction, and ensure the new terminal on Utica Av has better turning capacity.

3.  train extension up 10th avenue, along with actually building the 10th avenue station on the . I feel like this isn't discussed enough, but the West side of Manhattan is seeing rapid growth/development but is kinda a transit desert. I'd prolly terminate it at 72nd street where it meets up with the 7th Avenue line. Sad this hasn't gotten more discussion.

4. Astoria Extension to La Guardia and possibly beyond. Again, this part of Queens is a transit desert and the lack of access to La Guardia isn't great. Maybe it could even meet up with the at Met-Willets and/or Flushing to help balance the load there. In order to do this, you'd prolly need to de-interline so that 60th st tunnel soley serves Astoria which takes all B-way locals, or add a new tunnel.

5. Totally new line via 34th Street into Queens, and roughly follows the Long Island Express way to Kew Gardens and possibly further. Huge transit desert, and it'd help to alleviate the  which is one of the lines I'm most concerned about long term looking at population growth patterns and such.

Notable Exclusions:

1. Rockaway Branch. I feel like the only reason this gets so much talk is because the ROW exists. It wouldn't do that much to increase connectivity, and the Rockaways have some extremely low ridership levels. It'd also prolly run as a QBLVD local anyways so it wouldn't help much to speed things up either if say you're trying to get to JFK

2. Red Hook. This is a relatively new idea as the area is a transit desert and "trapped" by the BQE, and while it's a nice idea that should be built if we had the resouces, it just would serve so many fewer people than these other proposals for the cost.

3. Nostrand Avenue Line extension. If the Utica Avenue line is built, this becomes a lot less of a serious proposal because the area is no longer a transit desert and the neighboring lines should be able to take the load of South Brooklyn with ease.

4.  train extension. I don't disagree outer Queens is the biggest transit desert but extending the  much further would lead to further overcrowding, even with CBTC and 2-minute headways. If you built a reliever line for the  first, then this might become a more serious prospect.

5.  train extension further into Queens. Same thing as the one above, though I always feel bad how "wasted" the Eastern end of the Queens BLVD feels with 4 tracks and all.

 

Again these are only subway line projects. Things like the IBX and some LIRR/Metro North things I could argue are higher priority than some of the top 5 on this list.

[MTA Researcher]

8 minutes ago, ABCDEFGJLMNQRSSSWZ said:

Rockaway Branch. I feel like the only reason this gets so much talk is because the ROW exists. It wouldn't do that much to increase connectivity, and the Rockaways have some extremely low ridership levels. It'd also prolly run as a QBLVD local anyways so it wouldn't help much to speed things up either if say you're trying to get to JFK

In my proposals the  could give speed if you are coming from Bklyn or Manhattan as the  is 6 Av/Brighton Exp to Rock Pk. and  to Far Rock via Bway/4 Av Exp (Stopping at 45 and 53 Sts via new switch south of 36 St). 
 

Of course there’s a domino effect on service tweaks that I won’t go into details unless asked.

[TMC]

10 hours ago, ABCDEFGJLMNQRSSSWZ said:

1. A full length Second Avenue Subway. It doesn't have to be built with 4 tracks right away or go into the Bronx or Brooklyn yet, but I hope the MTA will do a better job with provisions in later phases so this is possible down the road say if ridership begins to demand a new train in the Bronx or smtg. I actually really support the idea of the 2nd Av Subway turning and going across 125th Street as the busses are crazy there and there's not any subways that connect East-West above midtown. I was glad the MTA at least seems mildly interested in the idea now.

2nd Ave really has to be split into 2 separate lines, one using the current subway, carrying the  and , and another, running under 3rd Ave in Midtown. The upper portion is up to debate however. 

[TDL]

On 1/28/2023 at 10:22 PM, TMC said:

Because that’s the truth, it increases capacity on the Fulton Street Line, which isn’t possible maintaining the current setup. So if the goal is increasing capacity, then yes, there is no more capacity for them to be served.

 

That’s okay, they are so unimportant to serve, I literally do not care what happens to them. 

As a Rockaway resident, I disagree.

 

Yes, the branching A is an extreme problem. But sending all trains to a branch with only three stops instead of serving what is still a transit desert? Really? Extend the C to Lefferts for those three stops if the branching is so concerning, or do Vanshnook's proposal of having the W to Euclid, C to Lefferts, A to Far Rock. Actually, I'd do it this way:

- Astoria-Euclid via 4th Ave/Fulton LCL (for yard access)

-Bay Ridge-Broadway Junction via. Nassau/Broadway LCL. Rush hrs in peak direction extended to Jamaica Ctr with skip stop service

-Broad St-Jamaica Ctr, Express in the peak direction between Marcy Ave and Broadway Junction. 

-Astoria-Coney Island via. Broadway LCL/4th Ave LCL/West End LCL

-Rerouted to 96th St/2nd Avenue

-207th St-Far Rockaway (express)

-168th St-Lefferts Blvd (Manhattan Local, Brooklyn Express)

-Rockaway Park-34th Street-Penn Station (5 morning trains, 5 evening trains). via. Rockaway express. Nonstop between Broad Channel and 80th St-Hudson St. 

 

 

[TMC]

1 hour ago, TDL said:

Yes, the branching A is an extreme problem. But sending all trains to a branch with only three stops instead of serving what is still a transit desert? Really? Extend the C to Lefferts for those three stops if the branching is so concerning, or do Vanshnook's proposal of having the W to Euclid, C to Lefferts, A to Far Rock. Actually, I'd do it this way:

 

That 3 stop branch is still stronger than the entirety of the Rockaway Peninsula. I don't think it's fair to consider an area a transit desert, when they also have several bus lines, and under my proposal, the prerequisite is that the LIRR Far Rockaway Branch is extended over the existing trackage to Rockaway Park, operated as a regional rail branch. This means it would get similar service levels to the subway, with a subway fare, just connected to the LIRR network, and going towards Jamaica via Locust Manor. Trips to Midtown would take only 4 minutes longer, and trips to Brooklyn would be much quicker via the Atlantic Branch. 

P.S. Not really fair to call areas with bus service a connecting bus ride to the subway or other rail line a "transit desert". My point is that the Rockaways are too weak of a branch to send subway capacity onto. I don't think any extra tunnels onto the Fulton Street Line are a good idea, as the line doesn't have enough demand to have a trunk worth of service. Severing the Rockaways from the system, and grafting it onto the LIRR is more of a reliability benefit than anything, you gain more ridership from making the rest of the system more reliable and predictable (i.e convenience), while the peninsula doesn't lose anything. 

[MTA Researcher]

44 minutes ago, TDL said:

- Astoria-Euclid via 4th Ave/Fulton LCL (for yard access)

-Bay Ridge-Broadway Junction via. Nassau/Broadway LCL. Rush hrs in peak direction extended to Jamaica Ctr with skip stop service

-Broad St-Jamaica Ctr, Express in the peak direction between Marcy Ave and Broadway Junction. 

-Astoria-Coney Island via. Broadway LCL/4th Ave LCL/West End LCL

-Rerouted to 96th St/2nd Avenue

-207th St-Far Rockaway (express)

-168th St-Lefferts Blvd (Manhattan Local, Brooklyn Express)

-Rockaway Park-34th Street-Penn Station (5 morning trains, 5 evening trains). via. Rockaway express. Nonstop between Broad Channel and 80th St-Hudson St. 

This doesn’t make sense…

 can’t go to Euclid via 4 Av

As an Astoria Resident I disapprove of  to 2 Av. I want my Broadway Express in Astoria.

 merge under this proposal south of Canal St

 Terminating at 34 St…. This will interfere with  as it must cross over to turn back, killing 8 Av line.

Try this instead:

 207 - Lefferts: CPW/8 Av/Fulton St Exp

 205 - CI: Weekday Concourse Exp, CPW/6 Av Exp - Brighton Lcl

 BPB - WTC: All Local

 JC - Euclid Av: QBL/8 Av Exp - Fulton St Lcl

 179 - CI: QBL Exp - 53rd - 6 Av Lcl - Culver Exp

 JC - Broad St: All Local

 via Peak Direction Exp

 96 St - Metropolitan Av: 2 Av Lcl via Williamsburg

 AstoriaDitmars - CI: Bway/4 Av Exp via Sea Beach

 Rockaway Pk - Brighton Beach: QBL Lcl - 63rd - 6 Av/Brighton Exp

 Far Rockaway - Bay Ridge 95 St: QBL Lcl via 60 St - Bway/4 Av Exp (stops at 45 and 53 Sts with new switch south of 36 St)

 168 - CI: CPW/Bway/4 Av Lcl via Montague St Tunnel and West End Lcl

 via West End Exp

 are fine

 are scrapped

 would join the system once 2 Av Subway goes into the Bronx. 

Extras

 to Flatbush

 to New Lots Av

 to Utica Av

 are fine as is.

[TMC]

13 hours ago, MTA Researcher said:

In my proposals the  could give speed if you are coming from Bklyn or Manhattan as the  is 6 Av/Brighton Exp to Rock Pk. and  to Far Rock via Bway/4 Av Exp (Stopping at 45 and 53 Sts via new switch south of 36 St). 
 

The problem I have with the Rockaway Beach Branch is that the alignment doesn't have such a good built environment around it, so you're sending 2 services (in your case) down a branch with mostly single-family homes and parking lots. Upzoning is the natural response, but why here? Why not do it around the existing stations? We haven't saturated the capacity for housing around most subway stations yet, so why build a line so reliant on new development?

Edited February 7, 2023 by TMC

[TDL]

Just now, MTA Researcher said:

This doesn’t make sense…

 can’t go to Euclid via 4 Av

As an Astoria Resident I disapprove of  to 2 Av. I want my Broadway Express in Astoria.

 merge under this proposal south of Canal St

 Terminating at 34 St…. This will interfere with  as it must cross over to turn back, killing 8 Av line.

Try this instead:

 207 - Lefferts: CPW/8 Av/Fulton St Exp

 205 - CI: Weekday Concourse Exp, CPW/6 Av Exp - Brighton Lcl

 BPB - WTC: All Local

 JC - Euclid Av: QBL/8 Av Exp - Fulton St Lcl

 179 - CI: QBL Exp - 53rd - 6 Av Lcl - Culver Exp

 JC - Broad St: All Local

 via Peak Direction Exp

 96 St - Metropolitan Av: 2 Av Lcl via Williamsburg

 AstoriaDitmars - CI: Bway/4 Av Exp via Sea Beach

 Rockaway Pk - Brighton Beach: QBL Lcl - 63rd - 6 Av/Brighton Exp

 Far Rockaway - Bay Ridge 95 St: QBL Lcl via 60 St - Bway/4 Av Exp (stops at 45 and 53 Sts with new switch south of 36 St)

 168 - CI: CPW/Bway/4 Av Lcl via Montague St Tunnel and West End Lcl

 via West End Exp

 are fine

 are scrapped

 would join the system once 2 Av Subway goes into the Bronx. 

Extras

 to Flatbush

 to New Lots Av

 to Utica Av

 are fine as is.

wouldnt go via 4th that was a typo. It would go Astoria/Broadway/Fulton.

The to Astoria creates a bottleneck, and the Broadway Express only skips 4 stops in Manhattan, so it doesnt create much of a time difference (unless you were headed to Brooklyn).

 already merge south of Canal Street, so thats a non-issue

 I definitely understand, especially during the rush hour. Any suggestions on where to short turn those Rock Pk trains that today are considered trains so that they dont go all the way to 207?

[TDL]

8 minutes ago, TMC said:

That 3 stop branch is still stronger than the entirety of the Rockaway Peninsula. I don't think it's fair to consider an area a transit desert, when they also have several bus lines, and under my proposal, the prerequisite is that the LIRR Far Rockaway Branch is extended over the existing trackage to Rockaway Park, operated as a regional rail branch. This means it would get similar service levels to the subway, with a subway fare, just connected to the LIRR network, and going towards Jamaica via Locust Manor. Trips to Midtown would take only 4 minutes longer, and trips to Brooklyn would be much quicker via the Atlantic Branch. 

P.S. Not really fair to call areas with bus service a connecting bus ride to the subway or other rail line a "transit desert". My point is that the Rockaways are too weak of a branch to send subway capacity onto. I don't think any extra tunnels onto the Fulton Street Line are a good idea, as the line doesn't have enough demand to have a trunk worth of service. Severing the Rockaways from the system, and grafting it onto the LIRR is more of a reliability benefit than anything, you gain more ridership from making the rest of the system more reliable and predictable (i.e convenience), while the peninsula doesn't lose anything. 

Where does your 4 minutes extra time figure come from?

That roundabout way adds miles to the commute.

Plus, MTA wouldnt make it a subway fare as it loops into Nassau

[TDL]

4 minutes ago, TMC said:

The problem I have with the Rockaway Beach Branch is that the alignment doesn't have such a good built environment around it, so you're sending 2 services (in your case) down a branch with mostly single-family homes and parking lots. Upzoning is the natural response, but why here? Why not do it around the existing stations? We haven't saturated the capacity for housing around most subway stations yet, so why build a line so reliant on new development?

Because the bones of the line are already there

[TDL]

4 minutes ago, TDL said:

wouldnt go via 4th that was a typo. It would go Astoria/Broadway/Fulton.

The to Astoria creates a bottleneck, and the Broadway Express only skips 4 stops in Manhattan, so it doesnt create much of a time difference (unless you were headed to Brooklyn).

 already merge south of Canal Street, so thats a non-issue

 I definitely understand, especially during the rush hour. Any suggestions on where to short turn those Rock Pk trains that today are considered trains so that they dont go all the way to 207?

The  could terminate at 125th St and layover in Homeball Alley. Could be peak direction only if it helps the bottleneck.

[MTA Researcher]

3 minutes ago, TDL said:

The to Astoria creates a bottleneck, and the Broadway Express only skips 4 stops in Manhattan, so it doesnt create much of a time difference (unless you were headed to Brooklyn).

Which is why I make a CPW/Bway Connection. Bway Lcl would connect to CPW Lcl via provision tracks north of 57 St/7 Av. This Enables Queens Bound Trains to skip 49 St, thus making 5 skips in Manhattan and eliminating Bottlenecks at 34 St Herald Square.

[TDL]

19 minutes ago, TMC said:

That 3 stop branch is still stronger than the entirety of the Rockaway Peninsula. I don't think it's fair to consider an area a transit desert, when they also have several bus lines, and under my proposal, the prerequisite is that the LIRR Far Rockaway Branch is extended over the existing trackage to Rockaway Park, operated as a regional rail branch. This means it would get similar service levels to the subway, with a subway fare, just connected to the LIRR network, and going towards Jamaica via Locust Manor. Trips to Midtown would take only 4 minutes longer, and trips to Brooklyn would be much quicker via the Atlantic Branch. 

P.S. Not really fair to call areas with bus service a connecting bus ride to the subway or other rail line a "transit desert". My point is that the Rockaways are too weak of a branch to send subway capacity onto. I don't think any extra tunnels onto the Fulton Street Line are a good idea, as the line doesn't have enough demand to have a trunk worth of service. Severing the Rockaways from the system, and grafting it onto the LIRR is more of a reliability benefit than anything, you gain more ridership from making the rest of the system more reliable and predictable (i.e convenience), while the peninsula doesn't lose anything. 

Remember the massive development going on in East NY and the rapid gentrification of Bed-Stuy. This is a way for the MTA to prepare for the influx and growth ahead of time so they dont end up with another overcrowded train scenario

[TMC]

2 minutes ago, TDL said:

Remember the massive development going on in East NY and the rapid gentrification of Bed-Stuy. This is a way for the MTA to prepare for the influx and growth ahead of time so they dont end up with another overcrowded train scenario

Most of that gentrification is not springing up on the Fulton Street Line though, it's along the Broadway El and Canarsie Line in Bushwick. In East New York, it's centered along the Canarsie and New Lots Lines, not the Fulton Street Line. The amount of riders at present, and with the rate of development so far isn't going to overcrowd Fulton.

[TDL]

Just now, TMC said:

Most of that gentrification is not springing up on the Fulton Street Line though, it's along the Broadway El and Canarsie Line in Bushwick. In East New York, it's centered along the Canarsie and New Lots Lines, not the Fulton Street Line. The amount of riders at present, and with the rate of development so far isn't going to overcrowd Fulton.

Again, factor in all the new construction in East New York near the Gateway Mall. I imagine commuters using the Fulton Line from Euclid.

Also, keep in mind the Beach Green, Rockaway Village, and Peninusla Housing projects all being built in the Rockaways.