Department of Subways - Proposals/Ideas

[TDL]

12 minutes ago, MTA Researcher said:

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.

So no Broadway/2nd Ave connection then? That means this line is isolated from the rest of the system? How would you connect your proposed to the Willy B? Add another branch to Chrystie Street?

[TMC]

5 minutes ago, TDL said:

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.

I'd imagine commuters would find an extension of the IRT New Lots Line more useful.

Yeah, which is why they get a regional rail branch severed from that portion of the subway. I don't foresee much development in the Rockaways besides what is happening on the Eastern end of the peninsula. It's also a bad place in general to put more housing, being far from the city, compared to the hundreds of subway stations closer towards Midtown and secondary CBDs. I'm not cutting them off, or giving them a worse option.

[TMC]

3 minutes ago, TDL said:

So no Broadway/2nd Ave connection then? That means this line is isolated from the rest of the system? How would you connect your proposed to the Willy B? Add another branch to Chrystie Street?

Broadway/2nd is very important, the Broadway Line has the most direct hit on Midtown jobs. I also don't agree with 2nd Ave as an alignment, specifically in Midtown, because the E-W transfers are far, and there are little jobs that far east. It doesn't fix a core capacity crunch more than it just adds extra residential coverage, which isn't the most important thing. 

[TDL]

3 minutes ago, TMC said:

I'd imagine commuters would find an extension of the IRT New Lots Line more useful.

Yeah, which is why they get a regional rail branch severed from that portion of the subway. I don't foresee much development in the Rockaways besides what is happening on the Eastern end of the peninsula. It's also a bad place in general to put more housing, being far from the city, compared to the hundreds of subway stations closer towards Midtown and secondary CBDs. I'm not cutting them off, or giving them a worse option.

There's actually quite a bit more proposed for the old Peninsula Hospital site, and for the area by the Rockaway ferry terminal.

 

Also, a New Lots line extension would still be a local service.

[TMC]

1 minute ago, TDL said:

There's actually quite a bit more proposed for the old Peninsula Hospital site, and for the area by the Rockaway ferry terminal.

 

Also, a New Lots line extension would still be a local service.

And that's where I'd leave it, the only reason this is happening in the Rockaways is broken policy on the housing front.

It'd ideally be an express, as fixing Rogers Junction would make that pattern easier. I'm not sure what the time difference would be vs. taking a bus up to Fulton, but I imagine that at higher frequencies allowed under de-interlining, and running express from Franklin-Borough Hall, my guess is that it'd be faster to both Manhattan, and non-Manhattan destinations.

[MTA Researcher]

31 minutes ago, TDL said:

So no Broadway/2nd Ave connection then? That means this line is isolated from the rest of the system? How would you connect your proposed to the Willy B? Add another branch to Chrystie Street?

2 Av is flawed. If Broadway Exp were to interline with 2 Av, it would have to go 2 Av Exp also…. Just like a CPW scenario. 
 

 would connect to Williamsburg via the center tracks at 2 Av - Houston St. in other words… Dogbone between 2 Av and Delaney St-Essex St.

 

I base my proposals on the Extreme idea. Extremely Express or Extermely Local. 2 Av Lcl/Bway Exp is a waste of good Bway Exp. Local everywhere in Manhattan except small part of Manhattan… that’s a waste… At least Broadway Exp coming from Queens can be alleviated because it’s not too far north. Also, I feel Queens riders need more Midtown Manhattan/Brooklyn Exp. Bronx on the other hand has  and Queens only has  .

In my proposal I balance it out with  from Bronx going a 1 or 2 borough express.   from Queens go a 1 or 2 borough Express. I have a feeling Queens residents will rejoice, knowing Queens is densely populated compared to the Bronx.

[MTA Researcher]

32 minutes ago, TMC said:

Broadway/2nd is very important, the Broadway Line has the most direct hit on Midtown jobs.

Then  we would need an express track on 2 Av or just do a flip on 57 St/7 Av where Queens Bound trains go Express in Broadway and 2 Av trains go Broadway Local.

[TMC]

1 minute ago, MTA Researcher said:

Then  we would need an express track on 2 Av or just do a flip on 57 St/7 Av where Queens Bound trains go Express in Broadway and 2 Av trains go Broadway Local.

Or just don't build 2nd Ave south of 72nd Street...

Needless to say, I am heavily against 2nd Ave Phases 3 and 4, but not against a new East Side Trunk.

[engineerboy6561]

On 10/12/2017 at 11:06 AM, T to Dyre Avenue said:

Are you proposing to reroute the  off the 8th Ave Line at West 4th St, then via the  to Broadway-Lafayette to accomplish all this? I can’t imagine how much of a choke point that’s going to be. And you wouldn’t be able to run this  very frequently because it would have to share tracks with the  and  between Broadway-Lafayette and West 4th, then the  upon returning to its current route. For a line that’s going to be on its own for most of the way, this isn’t an issue you want to have.

I’d much prefer to do a Utica Ave subway connected either to the Fulton St or Canarsie subways, where there is - potentially - capacity to accommodate another branch line (especially the Fulton St subway).

IMO a Utica Av subway should be combined with either a track connection between World Trade Center and Court St, or a major rebuilding of the Jamaica trunk that puts it underground. If you want to do with the  then connecting the local tracks below Canal St to the tracks at Court St would be ideal; you'd free the to run something close to 15tph during rush because the only merge it would have would be with the  at 145th and 59th; I'm assuming that 207 could probably handle most of that, and if not then 2-3tph could just turn at Dyckman St; that would also push inner Fulton local frequencies up to 21+ tph even if nothing is done to the . The only issue I can think of with that is that the turn off of Fulton and onto Euclid would be a tight 90-degree turn, which isn't ideal from a construction standpoint.

 

[engineerboy6561]

3 hours ago, TMC said:

Or just don't build 2nd Ave south of 72nd Street...

Needless to say, I am heavily against 2nd Ave Phases 3 and 4, but not against a new East Side Trunk.

Honestly 2 Av ought to be four tracks the whole way up, and run to the Bronx and Queens. I have a personal pipe dream proposal that I've articulated a few times, but the basic gist of it is this:

• A four-track trunk under 2 Av and 3 Av in Manhattan (2 Av from 125 St to 66 St or so, 3 Av between 66 and 37 Sts to connect to the 59 St complex and Grand Central, then 2 Av again from 37 St to Houston St)
• Another four-track trunk under 3 Av and Webster Av in the Bronx. This would run under 3 Av from 138 St to Fordham Plaza, Webster Av from Fordham Plaza to Norwood/205 St, then a two- or three-track extension under or over Gun Hill Rd to Bay Plaza; there would be provisions at 161 St for a branch to run via Boston Rd, Tremont Av, the Amtrak ROW, and the median of the Hutchinson River Parkway to Bay Plaza.
• Another four-track trunk under Northern Blvd and 36 Av in northern Queens. This would run from 36 Av from Vernon Blvd to Northern Blvd/42 St, Northern Blvd from 42 St to Flushing, with a two- or three-track extension under Northern to Bell Blvd. There would also be a provision for a branch to turn at Junction Blvd to run to the airport.
• Another four-track trunk along Broadway/Jamaica Av in Brooklyn and southeastern Queens. This would run under South 3rd St from Wythe Av to Marcy Av, Broadway from Marcy Av to Broadway Junction, Jamaica Av from Broadway Junction to 125 St or so, then via a tunnel to Parsons/Archer. From Parsons-Archer, two-track branches could fan out to run under Brewer Blvd, Farmers Blvd, and Merrick Blvd to provide subway service to working-class neighborhoods in SE Queens that are currently relying on overcrowded buses and dollar vans.

Basically that would set up the 2 Av core with a similar route pattern as 8 Av/CPW. The  would go to Astoria, the  would go to Forest Hills, and the  and  would jointly provide local service along the upper 2 Av corridor into the Bronx as far as Norwood-205 St, while the  would provide express service as far north as Norwood-205 St and local service alongside the  to Bay Plaza; if funding was available to add the extra Boston Rd branch the  would run to Norwood-205 St and the  would run to Bay Plaza via the branch.

 Three new routes would run along the Northern Blvd segment of the route, an express and two locals (I'm calling them  and  for now) would run from northern Queens into lower 2nd Av, joining it somewhere above 61 St (72 St-2 Av would be a multilevel station, with all three trains coming in from Queens stopping on the lowest level, express trains to the Bronx on the intermediate level, and the local  and  on the upper level currently in use. From there, the  would run to Delancey/Essex via 2 Av as a trunk, and then run into Queens. The  would turn off at Myrtle Av, while the  local and  expresses continued on to Parsons/Archer. At Parsons/Archer either all three services fan out, or the  terminates while the  and  split up; one runs under Merrick Blvd into Springfield Gardens, while the other one runs under Liberty Av and Farmers Blvd out to Locust Manor LIRR.

If we wanted other options, we could always add a new set of track connections between the existing Lower East Side-2 Av express tracks and the new Broadway/Jamaica line, and between the 2 Av line and Grand St station; that would allow the  and/or  to run to South Brooklyn/Coney Island, while the  and/or  would run to Queens.

Either way, that setup would decongest 57 St/7 Av, enable 30 additional express TPH between Jamaica and Manhattan, 15 bidirectional express TPH between Flushing and Manhattan, and 15 additional bidirectional express tph between the north Bronx and Manhattan; the hope here would be that the travel time via the revised Jamaica line between Jamaica and lower Midtown would be about even with travel time between Jamaica and upper Midtown via QBL, which would hopefully pull 30-50% of passengers off QBL expresses (so those trains wouldn't be SRO to/from Forest Hills anymore), the Northern Blvd trunk would take a big load off the (which would no longer be SRO from Grand Central to Junction Blvd or worse), and the 3 Av trunk with the connections to both the  and the  at Gun Hill/WPR and Gun Hill/Seymour Av, respectively, would offer significantly reduced travel times compared to those trains, which would take a large load off both 7 Av and Lex.

Edited February 7, 2023 by engineerboy6561

[TMC]

24 minutes ago, engineerboy6561 said:

• A four-track trunk under 2 Av and 3 Av in Manhattan (2 Av from 125 St to 66 St or so, 3 Av between 66 and 37 Sts to connect to the 59 St complex and Grand Central, then 2 Av again from 37 St to Houston St)
• Another four-track trunk under 3 Av and Webster Av in the Bronx. This would run under 3 Av from 138 St to Fordham Plaza, Webster Av from Fordham Plaza to Norwood/205 St, then a two- or three-track extension under or over Gun Hill Rd to Bay Plaza; there would be provisions at 161 St for a branch to run via Boston Rd, Tremont Av, the Amtrak ROW, and the median of the Hutchinson River Parkway to Bay Plaza.
• Another four-track trunk under Northern Blvd and 36 Av in northern Queens. This would run from 36 Av from Vernon Blvd to Northern Blvd/42 St, Northern Blvd from 42 St to Flushing, with a two- or three-track extension under Northern to Bell Blvd. There would also be a provision for a branch to turn at Junction Blvd to run to the airport.
• Another four-track trunk along Broadway/Jamaica Av in Brooklyn and southeastern Queens. This would run under South 3rd St from Wythe Av to Marcy Av, Broadway from Marcy Av to Broadway Junction, Jamaica Av from Broadway Junction to 125 St or so, then via a tunnel to Parsons/Archer. From Parsons-Archer, two-track branches could fan out to run under Brewer Blvd, Farmers Blvd, and Merrick Blvd to provide subway service to working-class neighborhoods in SE Queens that are currently relying on overcrowded buses and dollar vans.

 

- The Bronx, in my opinion doesn’t need a new subway. Metro North is quite underutilized at present, and I think 3rd/Webster Aves at best supports LRT. It does need extensions of existing lines however, such as the 6 towards Co-Op. 

- I think we should go double-track on any new subway through Manhattan. We can’t convert the upper portion of 2nd Ave into quad-track realistically, so the  must go somewhere else. I like the idea of going under Central Park and cutting across to West Harlem, and utilizing the layup tracks at 135th Street. I also really like idea of taking it into New Jersey over the GWB, at least to Fort Lee, potentially out to Paterson over Rte. 4. Jersey is a place that is in need of more rapid transit, more specifically, Hudson County and parts of Bergen County. In Midtown, it should use 3rd Avenue from 63rd Street down to Houston Street, to more directly decongest Lexington Ave, and be closer to Midtown jobs. This also allows it to decongest the  in Williamsburg and run down Utica Ave.

- In Queens, this means a double-track Northern Blvd Line running from Broadway LIRR, or further east, across 50th Street to further increase core capacity and decongest the , , , and . It could potentially loop down 10th Ave as an extension of the  or continue west into New Jersey, alignment is TBD. 
- I don’t think heavily rebuilding the Eastern Division is warranted. The  is the only crowded subway line in Brooklyn, no other line has saturated its capacity yet, so I don’t get the call for putting the Broadway El into a new quad-track subway under Broadway Brooklyn. 

[JustTheSIR]

If need be could the  return as a weekend service to supplement the lack of local 6th Avenue and QBL service from 2nd Av on the F to Forest Hills

[engineerboy6561]

46 minutes ago, TMC said:

- The Bronx, in my opinion doesn’t need a new subway. Metro North is quite underutilized at present, and I think 3rd/Webster Aves at best supports LRT. It does need extensions of existing lines however, such as the 6 towards Co-Op. 

- I think we should go double-track on any new subway through Manhattan. We can’t convert the upper portion of 2nd Ave into quad-track realistically, so the  must go somewhere else. I like the idea of going under Central Park and cutting across to West Harlem, and utilizing the layup tracks at 135th Street. I also really like idea of taking it into New Jersey over the GWB, at least to Fort Lee, potentially out to Paterson over Rte. 4. Jersey is a place that is in need of more rapid transit, more specifically, Hudson County and parts of Bergen County. In Midtown, it should use 3rd Avenue from 63rd Street down to Houston Street, to more directly decongest Lexington Ave, and be closer to Midtown jobs. This also allows it to decongest the  in Williamsburg and run down Utica Ave.

- In Queens, this means a double-track Northern Blvd Line running from Broadway LIRR, or further east, across 50th Street to further increase core capacity and decongest the , , , and . It could potentially loop down 10th Ave as an extension of the  or continue west into New Jersey, alignment is TBD. 
- I don’t think heavily rebuilding the Eastern Division is warranted. The  is the only crowded subway line in Brooklyn, no other line has saturated its capacity yet, so I don’t get the call for putting the Broadway El into a new quad-track subway under Broadway Brooklyn. 

A few comments:

 

I disagree that the central Bronx doesn't need more capacity; the and are all slammed during rush, and Metro North isn't going to be able to alleviate that well because it makes no stops between 125 St and 42 St, makes a grand total of three stops along the 3 Av corridor, and doesn't run south of 42nd St or hit any of the hospitals or other employers along the far East Side. Like right now that corridor is supporting a limited-stop bus, a BRT, and a lot of folks on that corridor wind up just taking the bus to either Concourse or WPR, which results in lower WPR  overcrowding pretty badly. A quad-track subway down that corridor with connections at Gun Hill Rd on both the and will draw folks to it from WPR, and the ~10min plus travel time improvement on a 3 Av or Concourse express over a or will also pull riders from the northeast Bronx onto the new corridor and decongest the lower half of WPR; an express down 2 Av is also a direct substitute for the Lex for anyone working at Rockefeller or any of the hospitals on the east side, which means it should pull most of those folks off the Lex, which should massively decongest it.

Rebuilding the Eastern Division is mostly about decongesting the with new express services that can match or improve on QBL travel time to major employers in Midtown and on the East Side; the reason the gets away with being so infrequent and poorly optimized is that nobody seriously considers it as an alternative to QBL because it doesn't serve Midtown and is 10-15 minutes slower than QBL expresses. If you offer Broadway/Jamaica Av expresses out of Sutphin and Parsons then the breakeven point between Jamaica Av and QBL (i.e. the station where two people taking QBL and Jamaica Av in a loop from Sutphin in opposite directions would arrive at the same time) moves from Delancey/Essex or Marcy Av well into Midtown, which takes a huge load off the and trains. The trunk also runs close enough to the west of Broadway Junction that local services there could pull a chunk of local passengers who don't take the seriously because of its lack of frequency and slow speeds.

I think not going quad-track on 2 Av was a profoundly stupid and short-sighted decision, and as expensive and obnoxious as adding a track pair under or next to the current track pair from 72nd St to 96 St is going to be we really ought to bite the bullet and do it. If not, then the only way you fix 57 St/7 Av is by giving upper 2 Av entirely to the and running the to Queens to decongest the .

I'd love to see subway service into NJ, but honestly given where their density is I'd advise doing that by extending PATH up JFK Blvd/Bergenline Av to Nungessers to start with, then eventually across the GWB to connect to the and , as well as adding a 57 St crosstown line that would connect with basically all the Manhattan trunks there. 

Edited February 7, 2023 by engineerboy6561

[ABCDEFGJLMNQRSSSWZ]

14 minutes ago, engineerboy6561 said:

A few comments:

 

I disagree that the central Bronx doesn't need more capacity; the and are all slammed during rush, and Metro North isn't going to be able to alleviate that well because it makes no stops between 125 St and 42 St, makes a grand total of three stops along the 3 Av corridor, and doesn't run south of 42nd St or hit any of the hospitals or other employers along the far East Side. Like right now that corridor is supporting a limited-stop bus, a BRT, and a lot of folks on that corridor wind up just taking the bus to either Concourse or WPR, which results in lower WPR  overcrowding pretty badly. A quad-track subway down that corridor with connections at Gun Hill Rd on both the and will draw folks to it from WPR, and the ~10min plus travel time improvement on a 3 Av or Concourse express over a or will also pull riders from the northeast Bronx onto the new corridor and decongest the lower half of WPR; an express down 2 Av is also a direct substitute for the Lex for anyone working at Rockefeller or any of the hospitals on the east side, which means it should pull most of those folks off the Lex, which should massively decongest it.

Rebuilding the Eastern Division is mostly about decongesting the with new express services that can match or improve on QBL travel time to major employers in Midtown and on the East Side; the reason the gets away with being so infrequent and poorly optimized is that nobody seriously considers it as an alternative to QBL because it doesn't serve Midtown and is 10-15 minutes slower than QBL expresses. If you offer Broadway/Jamaica Av expresses out of Sutphin and Parsons then the breakeven point between Jamaica Av and QBL (i.e. the station where two people taking QBL and Jamaica Av in a loop from Sutphin in opposite directions would arrive at the same time) moves from Delancey/Essex or Marcy Av well into Midtown, which takes a huge load off the and trains. The trunk also runs close enough to the west of Broadway Junction that local services there could pull a chunk of local passengers who don't take the seriously because of its lack of frequency and slow speeds.

I think not going quad-track on 2 Av was a profoundly stupid and short-sighted decision, and as expensive and obnoxious as adding a track pair under or next to the current track pair from 72nd St to 96 St is going to be we really ought to bite the bullet and do it. If not, then the only way you fix 57 St/7 Av is by giving upper 2 Av entirely to the and running the to Queens to decongest the .

I'd love to see subway service into NJ, but honestly given where their density is I'd advise doing that by extending PATH up JFK Blvd/Bergenline Av to Nungessers to start with, then eventually across the GWB to connect to the and , as well as adding a 57 St crosstown line that would connect with basically all the Manhattan trunks there. 

I think for the Bronx, a large problem is just the lack of true express service (4 track lines). The  train for instance serves 18 stops in a row by itself on a 2/3 track line before it connects with anything else. White Plains Road line is also very long. If one were to build say a new 3rd Av line that had stations spaced further apart, I think it'd be a huge help in both making people's commutes better and taking people off other lines. I also think the MTA should investigate doing a true express service using the currently unused tracks along the Metro North ROW to help the and again provide a quicker alternative. Vashnook has proposed smtg like this before. 

I think for phase 2 of SAS, the MTA would be smart to build 116th Street so it could be converted express down the road, and with provisions for the Bronx via this express provision, with local SAS trains going Crosstown at 125th. 72nd Street would be the next express station with a new lower level set up simillar to Lex Av 63rd. Have Broadway express trains serve northern SAS as express service into the Bronx and full line SAS trains be local and go across 125th.

The section below 72nd street would also have provisions to be 4 tracks for a potential future service that runs from Lower Manhattan and turns into Queens somewhere between 55th and 72nd street to help out the  .

Basically:

 - Current Route but via SAS express and 3rd Av in the Bronx to Gun Hill Road

 - Current Route but SAS express via Metro North ROW to Baychester or CO-OP city or smtg

 - SAS local from 137th Street City College across 125th Street, down 2nd Av, to Hanover Square or whatever.

Teal  - Southern half of SAS as express and into Queens on some new line.

 

This would also keep SAS relatively de-interlined.

[TMC]

23 minutes ago, engineerboy6561 said:

I disagree that the central Bronx doesn't need more capacity; the and are all slammed during rush, and Metro North isn't going to be able to alleviate that well because it makes no stops between 125 St and 42 St, makes a grand total of three stops along the 3 Av corridor, and doesn't run south of 42nd St or hit any of the hospitals or other employers along the far East Side. Like right now that corridor is supporting a limited-stop bus, a BRT, and a lot of folks on that corridor wind up just taking the bus to either Concourse or WPR, which results in lower WPR  overcrowding pretty badly. A quad-track subway down that corridor with connections at Gun Hill Rd on both the and will draw folks to it from WPR, and the ~10min plus travel time improvement on a 3 Av or Concourse express over a or will also pull riders from the northeast Bronx onto the new corridor and decongest the lower half of WPR; an express down 2 Av is also a direct substitute for the Lex for anyone working at Rockefeller or any of the hospitals on the east side, which means it should pull most of those folks off the Lex, which should massively decongest it.

You also have to consider that operating Metro North like a true regional rail network would probably decrease subway crowding. Not to mention, not many people are getting off north of 59th Street, the vast majority are headed to Midtown, even if their destinations are non-core, because that’s where all of the interchange stations are. There is lots of demand along 3rd Ave and Webster Ave, but according to OnTheMap, non-Manhattan demand seems extremely localized, hence the high bus ridership and my pitch for LRT. The way I have the 2nd and 3rd Ave Lines set up, is so that 3rd Ave runs nonstop from 63rd Street up to Harlem, with the first stop in Harlem being 110th Street-Central Park North, then to 125th Street. It acts as an express. WPR and Lex are overcrowded, but they haven’t reached absolute peak capacity yet, and that’s where I pitch de-interlining. The amount of TPH compared to passengers would significantly increase, meaning my method is more cost effective at decongesting Lex and WPR (in my opinion) 
 

 

24 minutes ago, engineerboy6561 said:

Rebuilding the Eastern Division is mostly about decongesting the with new express services that can match or improve on QBL travel time to major employers in Midtown and on the East Side; the reason the gets away with being so infrequent and poorly optimized is that nobody seriously considers it as an alternative to QBL because it doesn't serve Midtown and is 10-15 minutes slower than QBL expresses. If you offer Broadway/Jamaica Av expresses out of Sutphin and Parsons then the breakeven point between Jamaica Av and QBL (i.e. the station where two people taking QBL and Jamaica Av in a loop from Sutphin in opposite directions would arrive at the same time) moves from Delancey/Essex or Marcy Av well into Midtown, which takes a huge load off the and trains. The trunk also runs close enough to the west of Broadway Junction that local services there could pull a chunk of local passengers who don't take the seriously because of its lack of frequency and slow speeds.

This is another place where I think investment into regional rail comes into play. If you made LIRR service more attractive through more frequent service and fare integration, you’d decongest the Queens Blvd expresses quite a lot, the LIRR is actually slighter quicker to Penn than the . The ‘s problem isn’t speed, it’s just not capturing ridership in Richmond Hill, Cypress Hills, and East New York, because those places are very underdeveloped. The solution is just TOD, and making the LIRR Atlantic Branch more attractive, and linking it through Lower Manhattan into New Jersey eventually. 

[TMC]

5 minutes ago, ABCDEFGJLMNQRSSSWZ said:

I think for the Bronx, a large problem is just the lack of true express service (4 track lines). The  train for instance serves 18 stops in a row by itself on a 2/3 track line before it connects with anything else. White Plains Road line is also very long. If one were to build say a new 3rd Av line that had stations spaced further apart, I think it'd be a huge help in both making people's commutes better and taking people off other lines. I also think the MTA should investigate doing a true express service using the currently unused tracks along the Metro North ROW to help the and again provide a quicker alternative. Vashnook has proposed smtg like this before. 

 

The problem with the Bronx is that the lines are simply capacity constrained because of interlining, the only crowded line that is “at capacity” is the Pelham Line, and it really isn’t at capacity because the express service severely hinders it from reaching its full potential. WPR operates at just above 20 TPH, but it has to demand to warrant a full trunk’s capacity (30-40 TPH). Same with Jerome. Concourse is underused because of its comparatively low frequency, so that also needs to be considered. Metro North should provide around 24 TPH on the Harlem Line, running local through the Bronx. So, yes, Bronx subways are overcrowded, but they aren’t necessarily at capacity, and warrant new lines to be constructed. 

[ABCDEFGJLMNQRSSSWZ]

1 hour ago, TMC said:

- The Bronx, in my opinion doesn’t need a new subway. Metro North is quite underutilized at present, and I think 3rd/Webster Aves at best supports LRT. It does need extensions of existing lines however, such as the 6 towards Co-Op. 

- I think we should go double-track on any new subway through Manhattan. We can’t convert the upper portion of 2nd Ave into quad-track realistically, so the  must go somewhere else. I like the idea of going under Central Park and cutting across to West Harlem, and utilizing the layup tracks at 135th Street. I also really like idea of taking it into New Jersey over the GWB, at least to Fort Lee, potentially out to Paterson over Rte. 4. Jersey is a place that is in need of more rapid transit, more specifically, Hudson County and parts of Bergen County. In Midtown, it should use 3rd Avenue from 63rd Street down to Houston Street, to more directly decongest Lexington Ave, and be closer to Midtown jobs. This also allows it to decongest the  in Williamsburg and run down Utica Ave.

- In Queens, this means a double-track Northern Blvd Line running from Broadway LIRR, or further east, across 50th Street to further increase core capacity and decongest the , , , and . It could potentially loop down 10th Ave as an extension of the  or continue west into New Jersey, alignment is TBD. 
- I don’t think heavily rebuilding the Eastern Division is warranted. The  is the only crowded subway line in Brooklyn, no other line has saturated its capacity yet, so I don’t get the call for putting the Broadway El into a new quad-track subway under Broadway Brooklyn. 

Would it be possible to make 116th-2nd av an express station but have the express tracks run down 3rd Av and then it switches back over to 2nd av. Wouldn't be ideal but that might be the best you could do to making SAS a true trunk line.

I also think going under Central Park is really underrated cause it'd allow for a true super express to the Bronx plus going under Central Park is a lot less logistically complex than going under an avenue in Manhattan. However, if the  is going under Central Park, that kinda ruins the point of the  at least as it was originally intended.

As for the , it's only running like 18 or 20 tph as is in large part because the terminals on both ends lack tail tracks. If they built tail tracks, they could prolly boost service at least a few tph along the . The area of the biggest concern based on the last Census is the Williamsburg Part near Bedford and Metropolitan Av stations, but worst case the MTA could make a shuttle train into Manhattan that parallels the , with the chance for a future system connection.

[TMC]

Just now, ABCDEFGJLMNQRSSSWZ said:

Would it be possible to make 116th-2nd av an express station but have the express tracks run down 3rd Av and then it switches back over to 2nd av. Wouldn't be ideal but that might be the best you could do to making SAS a true trunk line.

I also think going under Central Park is really underrated cause it'd allow for a true super express to the Bronx plus going under Central Park is a lot less logistically complex than going under an avenue in Manhattan. However, if the  is going under Central Park, that kinda ruins the point of the  at least as it was originally intended.

The reason I like that alignment is because I am a staunch believer in the fact that the Bronx doesn’t need any new subway trunk line, plus, it would already connect with 2nd Ave at Lex-63rd. 
 

It’s also because I feel like Fort Lee and the Rt. 4 corridor is a more appealing use of capacity than a Bronx extension, where we haven’t saturated the current infrastructure yet. Going under the park and swinging west is the ideal alignment for this. 

[engineerboy6561]

1 hour ago, TMC said:

The problem with the Bronx is that the lines are simply capacity constrained because of interlining, the only crowded line that is “at capacity” is the Pelham Line, and it really isn’t at capacity because the express service severely hinders it from reaching its full potential. WPR operates at just above 20 TPH, but it has to demand to warrant a full trunk’s capacity (30-40 TPH). Same with Jerome. Concourse is underused because of its comparatively low frequency, so that also needs to be considered. Metro North should provide around 24 TPH on the Harlem Line, running local through the Bronx. So, yes, Bronx subways are overcrowded, but they aren’t necessarily at capacity, and warrant new lines to be constructed. 

OK; as things stand now Metro-North has about 60tph hard maximum worth of slots available into GCT, assuming that they upgrade their signaling system to something computer-controlled and moving-block to let them get 30tph per track pair. Split that up about evenly between Hudson, Harlem, and New Haven and that gets you 40 trains going through the Harlem Line corridor, of which 20 would be on the Harlem Line; figure during peak time that a little under half that capacity needs to go through to Southeast and Wassaic, so you have about 12tph you could configure as North White Plains locals and run making all stops, including Melrose, Tremont, and if possible a new stop at 149 St or 138 St Grand Concourse. Those trains will likely be at least half full of people who are either coming from or going beyond the city limits, so you have about 4-6tph of free capacity, and Metro-North trains fit a lot fewer people than subway trains; I'm not sure that would actually be enough to meet demand, though it's not a bad stopgap.

The LIRR has a grand total of 70-85tph hard maximum available if it upgrades its signaling system; there are two tracks under the 63 St tubes and four in the East River tubes, and out of that Amtrak moves and NJT moves to Sunnyside combined eat up anywhere from 5 to 20tph worth of capacity depending on how things go; that capacity then needs to be spread across up to ten branches, so each branch can push maybe 7-8tph into the city during rush if things go extremely well for them. Out of that I'd say that Hempstead, West Hempstead, Port Washington, Far Rockaway, and Long Beach are all short enough that adding in the extra travel time for commuters that additional local stops would entail makes sense, so you could probably get about 6-7 LIRR tph on Port Washington with a pocket track at Great Neck to turn trains, and probably about 20ish tph stopping at Kew Gardens, Forest Hills, and Woodside (which is a more direct alternative to QBL), though during rush I think most of those trains would be 60-80% full, so actual available capacity would be closer to 5-7tph worth.

As far as WPR not needing an express, I seriously disagree. The travel time on the from 241st and Wakefield to 42nd-Times Sq is on par with the travel time on the and from Coney Island to Times Square, and there are express trains that make that run in meaningfully less time (the gets from Brighton Beach to Herald Sq in 40 mins flat) that run because people from that far out deserve a proper bidirectional express service. A 3 Av express to a Gun Hill Rd crosstown basically knocks 20 minutes off that commute, which gets a whole bunch of northern Bronx riders off WPR and frees up seats for people coming in from the South and Central Bronx.

I do agree that NJ needs subway service, but I don't think trying to burn the north end of a double-tracked 2 Av line there makes much sense. NJ basically needs a four-track trunk running down Bergenline Av/JFK Blvd from 91 St down to Communipaw Av, could also use 15-30tph into Manhattan at various points, and could also use proper subway service through Newark. I sort of picked up a crayon and threw this together as something I think NJ could use as far as subway service is concerned:

https://metrodreamin.com/view/ZWUxVVR2d2tYZ2d3NnprYkFybTBoU1k2NWkzM3wy

Key points:

• A four-track trunk between 91 St/Bergenline Av on the north end and Newark Penn Station on the south end; this offers 30 express tph and 30 local tph worth of capacity on this corridor, which is more than enough to replace the jitneys, the PATH, and the 1 bus
• 15tph from the GWB to Newark via Anderson Av and Fort Lee; this basically replaces the northern half of the Bergenline Jitney route
• 15tph between NJ and 125 St; this would replace the 125 St crosstown portion of the 2 Av subway, and offer both crosstown connections between NYC subway lines and a direct connection between Harlem and NJ.
• 30tph between midtown and Bergenline Av; a combined 15tph coming from the north and 15tph coming from the south into the heart of Midtown, with connections to 59 St , 57 St/7 Av , 57 St , and 59 St
• Several branches that basically absorb some of the busiest routes in northeastern NJ: Line 1 absorbs most of the 25, Line 2 covers the combined 21/71/73/79, Line 3 absorbs the 31, Lines 4 and 7 together replace the Paterson-PABT jitneys, Line 5 absorbs the Bayonne jitneys and replaces them with a one-seat ride to Midtown, Line 6 replaces all the Paterson-GWB jitneys, Line 8 replaces the 13, Lines 1 and 4 replace the 159, and the Hoboken PATH extension replaces the 126.

 

 

[TMC]

12 hours ago, engineerboy6561 said:

OK; as things stand now Metro-North has about 60tph hard maximum worth of slots available into GCT, assuming that they upgrade their signaling system to something computer-controlled and moving-block to let them get 30tph per track pair. Split that up about evenly between Hudson, Harlem, and New Haven and that gets you 40 trains going through the Harlem Line corridor, of which 20 would be on the Harlem Line; figure during peak time that a little under half that capacity needs to go through to Southeast and Wassaic, so you have about 12tph you could configure as North White Plains locals and run making all stops, including Melrose, Tremont, and if possible a new stop at 149 St or 138 St Grand Concourse. Those trains will likely be at least half full of people who are either coming from or going beyond the city limits, so you have about 4-6tph of free capacity, and Metro-North trains fit a lot fewer people than subway trains; I'm not sure that would actually be enough to meet demand, though it's not a bad stopgap.

To clarify, this is how I would set things up:

Harlem Line - 24 TPH all-local 

Hudson Line - 4 TPH express to GCT, 4 TPH local to GCT (NJT Thru-Running), 4 TPH local via Empire Conn. to Penn Station (LIRR Thru-running) 

New Haven Line - 4 TPH local to Penn Station (NJT Thru-running via Hells Gate), 4 TPH local to Penn Station (NJT Thru-Running via GCT), 12 TPH express to Penn Station (NJT Thru-Running via GCT)

On Park Ave, Harlem Line trains would make all local stops, and New Haven Line trains using the corridor would run express. Dual-island platforms at Fordham and a new station at 149th Street can accommodate transfers, although reducing schedule padding would reduce the need for express trips on the Harlem Line. All junctions could and should be grade-separated to permit high frequencies. 

This, I think, could pull riders away from the northern segments of WPR, Dyre, and maybe Pelham, especially if Concourse gets extended to Gun Hill/White Plains Rds with a transfer at Williamsbridge. That kind of integration is the kind we need to pull riders off of crowded subway lines. 

Regarding rolling stock, capacity is sufficient on current rolling stock, but new rolling stock should accommodate more standing passengers, while retaining comfort for suburban commuters, the BR Class 700 should be a model to consider.  

[engineerboy6561]

8 minutes ago, TMC said:

To clarify, this is how I would set things up:

Harlem Line - 24 TPH all-local 

Hudson Line - 4 TPH express to GCT, 4 TPH local to GCT (NJT Thru-Running), 4 TPH local via Empire Conn. to Penn Station (LIRR Thru-running) 

New Haven Line - 4 TPH local to Penn Station (NJT Thru-running via Hells Gate), 4 TPH local to Penn Station (NJT Thru-Running via GCT), 12 TPH express to Penn Station (NJT Thru-Running via GCT)

On Park Ave, Harlem Line trains would make all local stops, and New Haven Line trains using the corridor would run express. Dual-island platforms at Fordham and a new station at 149th Street can accommodate transfers, although reducing schedule padding would reduce the need for express trips on the Harlem Line. All junctions could and should be grade-separated to permit high frequencies. 

This, I think, could pull riders away from the northern segments of WPR, Dyre, and maybe Pelham, especially if Concourse gets extended to Gun Hill/White Plains Rds with a transfer at Williamsbridge. That kind of integration is the kind we need to pull riders off of crowded subway lines. 

Regarding rolling stock, capacity is sufficient on current rolling stock, but new rolling stock should accommodate more standing passengers, while retaining comfort for suburban commuters, the BR Class 700 should be a model to consider.  

24 tph all local would be a shitshow for anyone coming in from northern Westchester, Putnam, and Duchess counties, as well as the folks driving in from Fairfield and Litchfield Counties because the Danbury branch is so infrequent; the run from North White Plains to GCT making all stops is an hour to an hour and five minutes, and the run from Southeast to GCT is currently an hour and a half (45-50 minutes making all stops north of North White Plains, then another 40-45 minutes into GCT); making all trips to Southeast local would push that travel time almost to two hours and push travel times from Wassaic and the far upper ends of the line up from 2:05-2:30 to 2:45-3:00, which is much. I'd say the absolute most you can get away with is 12-16tph local in the city, which during rush would give you 4-8tph worth of extra capacity. 

Also, you can't through-run NJT via Grand Central unless you're proposing a new tunnel between NYP and GCT (which isn't a terrible idea), and you only really have 20-25tph worth of slots via Hell Gate total (30tph absolute max, but Amtrak will probably take 5-10 of those slots). Your core constraints on Midtown are:

• 30tph LIRR to Grand Central Madison
• 60tph into Penn from the east side, of which 45-55 would be available for commuter use
• 30tph over Hell Gate, of which 15-25 would be available for commuter use
• 60tph via Park Av into GCT
• Currently 8-10tph into Penn via the Empire connection, potentially increasable to 30 if you double track across Spuyten Duyvil and south of 39 St, and convert that junction to a flyover.
• 30tph into Penn from NJT

There are probably ways to make that work to take some load off the Bronx and Queens, but it's nontrivial and messy. TBH, if we could get funding for it and through-running were to happen I'd be very interested in adding underground platforms at Hoboken Terminal and connecting them to a new, much lower-level platform at Atlantic Terminal, with intermediate stops at Canal St  and West 4th St  as a replacement for the Hoboken ferry service, and as a way to relieve lower Midtown demand on QBL.

[TDL]

23 hours ago, TMC said:

I'd imagine commuters would find an extension of the IRT New Lots Line more useful.

Yeah, which is why they get a regional rail branch severed from that portion of the subway. I don't foresee much development in the Rockaways besides what is happening on the Eastern end of the peninsula. It's also a bad place in general to put more housing, being far from the city, compared to the hundreds of subway stations closer towards Midtown and secondary CBDs. I'm not cutting them off, or giving them a worse option.

Unfortunately, they're already building the housing. Which means the transit service has to stay.

[Lawrence St]

15 minutes ago, TDL said:

Unfortunately, they're already building the housing. Which means the transit service has to stay.

Nothing “has” to stay. The TA can choose one day to close the entire Franklin Shuttle if they wanted to as an example. The only exception to this is 135th St where it was suppose to close but the overwhelming opposition kept it open.

[TDL]

13 minutes ago, Lawrence St said:

Nothing “has” to stay. The TA can choose one day to close the entire Franklin Shuttle if they wanted to as an example. The only exception to this is 135th St where it was suppose to close but the overwhelming opposition kept it open.

True. And that same overwhelming opposition would occur if anyone thought of eliminating the Rockaway 

[Lex]

57 minutes ago, Lawrence St said:

Nothing “has” to stay. The TA can choose one day to close the entire Franklin Shuttle if they wanted to as an example. The only exception to this is 135th St where it was suppose to close but the overwhelming opposition kept it open.

That was 145th Street. Closing 135th Street would be beyond stupid.