Department of Subways - Proposals/Ideas

[Union Tpke]

Speaking as a rider who uses the fairly regularly, if you don't ride the / skip-stop service during rush hours (both AM and PM), don't even bother suggesting to eliminate skip-stop service.

 

Thank you.

I personally would add the third center track, convert Woodhaven to an express stop. The Z would be express, and the J local, the Z would also run on the center track between Myrtle av and broadway jct

[Armandito]

Yeah, no. All for a new line to SAS? I doubt riders on the Myrtle Av branch (including the ones at Myrtle, Flushing, Lorimer, Hewes and Marcy) would give up their one-seat ride to Midtown Manhattan that fast, as almost none of those riders are heading towards Lower Manhattan, and the is already crowded with its own riders too by the way. And also, you'd be delaying the / and at Broad Street.

 

Anyway, didn't you used to live in Ridgewood (according to your old account as Q90)?

To be honest, I never lived in Ridgewood before. I grew up in Elmhurst and now I live in the Bronx in Westchester Square. Also, I never had an account under the name Q90 (and was a member here long before Q90), so leave me alone. Thank you Edited January 14, 2015 by lara8710

[RollOver]

I think the skip-stop service should be like this instead:

 

121 St - Z stops, J skips

111 St - J stops, Z skips

104 St - Z stops, J skips

Woodhaven Blvd - J stops, Z skips

85 St – Forest Parkway - Z stops, J skips

75 St – Elderts Lane - J stops, Z skips

Cypress Hills - Z stops, J skips

Crescent St - J stops, Z skips

Norwood Av - Z stops, J skips

Cleveland St - J stops, Z skips

Van Siclen Av - Z stops, J skips

Alabama Av - J stops, Z skips

Chauncey St - Z stops, J skips

Halsey St - J stops, Z skips

Gates Av - Z stops, J skips

Kosciuszko St - J stops, Z skips

 

As you can see, it's still overall the same, except that Woodhaven Blvd, Crescent St and Alabama Av are no longer "all trains stop" stations.

 

Weekday peak-direction Express service between Myrtle and Marcy can stay, as understood because of the and also simplicity. However, I also do agree that they should make the center track connect to the two outer tracks west of Marcy before crossing the bridge. That way, the / doesn't have to stop at Marcy at all except weekends and nights when trains make every stop between Jamaica and Broad. But I can't, however, due to the bus terminal at Marcy. If it weren't for the bus terminal at Marcy, then yes.

 

@lara8710

 

Nice way of playing the living ass out of me. Well done. How pity.

Edited January 14, 2015 by RollOver

[Armandito]

I think the skip-stop service should be like this instead:

 

121 St - Z stops, J skips

111 St - J stops, Z skips

104 St - Z stops, J skips

Woodhaven Blvd - J stops, Z skips

85 St – Forest Parkway - Z stops, J skips

75 St – Elderts Lane - J stops, Z skips

Cypress Hills - Z stops, J skips

Crescent St - J stops, Z skips

Norwood Av - Z stops, J skips

Cleveland St - J stops, Z skips

Van Siclen Av - Z stops, J skips

Alabama Av - J stops, Z skips

Chauncey St - Z stops, J skips

Halsey St - J stops, Z skips

Gates Av - Z stops, J skips

Kosciuszko St - J stops, Z skips

 

As you can see, it's still overall the same, except that Woodhaven Blvd, Crescent St and Alabama Av are no longer "all trains stop" stations.

 

Weekday peak-direction Express service between Myrtle and Marcy can stay, as understood because of the and also simplicity. However, I also do agree that they should make the center track connect to the two outer tracks west of Marcy before crossing the bridge. That way, the / doesn't have to stop at Marcy at all except weekends and nights when trains make every stop between Jamaica and Broad. But I can't, however, due to the bus terminal at Marcy. If it weren't for the bus terminal at Marcy, then yes.

 

@lara8710

 

Nice way of playing the living ass out of me. Well done. How pity.

Take a closer look at my profile... Edited January 14, 2015 by lara8710

[MTA Dude]

 

I think the skip-stop service should be like this instead:

 

121 St - Z stops, J skips

111 St - J stops, Z skips

104 St - Z stops, J skips

Woodhaven Blvd - J stops, Z skips

85 St – Forest Parkway - Z stops, J skips

75 St – Elderts Lane - J stops, Z skips

Cypress Hills - Z stops, J skips

Crescent St - J stops, Z skips

Norwood Av - Z stops, J skips

Cleveland St - J stops, Z skips

Van Siclen Av - Z stops, J skips

Alabama Av - J stops, Z skips

Chauncey St - Z stops, J skips

Halsey St - J stops, Z skips

Gates Av - Z stops, J skips

Kosciuszko St - J stops, Z skips

 

As you can see, it's still overall the same, except that Woodhaven Blvd, Crescent St and Alabama Av are no longer "all trains stop" stations.

 

Weekday peak-direction Express service between Myrtle and Marcy can stay, as understood because of the and also simplicity. However, I also do agree that they should make the center track connect to the two outer tracks west of Marcy before crossing the bridge. That way, the / doesn't have to stop at Marcy at all except weekends and nights when trains make every stop between Jamaica and Broad. But I can't, however, due to the bus terminal at Marcy. If it weren't for the bus terminal at Marcy, then yes.

 

Yeah, you just created a pain in the neck for the few riders who actually don't want skip stop service due to the transfer betweent the and because they go to a certain local stop. Plus, what does the bus terminal have to do with connecting the stub-end track to the other two?

I personally would add the third center track, convert Woodhaven to an express stop. The Z would be express, and the J local, the Z would also run on the center track between Myrtle av and broadway jct

 

Exactly what I was saying before. Although, I feel like the is a better candidate for express and put the on local.

[Armandito]

The R.O.W. is open cut so it can be built above it, and the 63rd Street Tunnel was built for it anyway. The is just too cheap to spend the extra $400 million in building it .

Where and how would a connection to the Forest Hills-71 Av station be built? Edited January 14, 2015 by lara8710

[RollOver]

Yeah, you just created a pain in the neck for the few riders who actually don't want skip stop service due to the transfer between the and because they go to a certain local stop. Plus, what does the bus terminal have to do with connecting the stub-end track to the other two?

I honestly don't care what you just said because skip-stop only runs for an hour and it's only just three stops and few riders. Big whoop. Move on. Those 3 stations aren't even that huge station complexes with transfers/connections to other lines and/or other modes of transportation anyway. That's like a passenger whining that his/her train was delayed so therefore, the rest of the subway system should be delayed as well, when yet, they could have just left home earlier to catch the train and gave his/herself extra time. Also, did you even pay any attention at all? None of the buses that originate/terminate at Marcy go to/from Manhattan which is why all trains stop at Marcy. So your excuse literary means nothing at all. Sorry.

Edited January 14, 2015 by RollOver

[Armandito]

I honestly don't care what you just said because skip-stop only runs for an hour and it's only just three stops and few riders. Big whoop. Move on. Those 3 stations aren't even that huge station complexes with transfers/connections to other lines and/or other modes of transportation anyway. That's like a passenger whining that his/her train was delayed so therefore, the rest of the subway system should be delayed as well, when yet, they could have just left home earlier to catch the train and gave his/herself extra time. Also, did you even pay any attention at all? None of the buses that originate/terminate at Marcy go to/from Manhattan which is why all trains stop at Marcy. So your excuse literary means nothing at all. Sorry.

That's not all true, because the B39 bus originates at Marcy and crosses the Williamsburg Bridge to Manhattan, so there you go.

[RollOver]

That's not all true, because the B39 bus originates at Marcy and crosses the Williamsburg Bridge to Manhattan, so there you go.

You're being naive you know. That bus begins/ends at the Lower East Side of Manhattan. Remember, subway riders at Marcy also want Lower Manhattan and/or Midtown Manhattan. I'm very sure that those riders won't bother stuffing themselves onto a bus when a nearly full-length train can hold thousands of riders all together as a whole.

Edited January 14, 2015 by RollOver

[BM5 via Woodhaven]

 

I think the skip-stop service should be like this instead:

 

121 St - Z stops, J skips

111 St - J stops, Z skips

104 St - Z stops, J skips

Woodhaven Blvd - J stops, Z skips

85 St – Forest Parkway - Z stops, J skips

75 St – Elderts Lane - J stops, Z skips

Cypress Hills - Z stops, J skips

Crescent St - J stops, Z skips

Norwood Av - Z stops, J skips

Cleveland St - J stops, Z skips

Van Siclen Av - Z stops, J skips

Alabama Av - J stops, Z skips

Chauncey St - Z stops, J skips

Halsey St - J stops, Z skip

 

Big no to Woodhaven being a skip-stop station, I honestly think both services need to stop there That station gets a good chunk of riders of those who need Downtown Access and or don't take the express bus and/or need it for Broadway. I would honestly just keep all the current J/Z stops as they are, because the in the long run, it doesn't save much time (if any), and inconveniences the people at those stops which will now be a skip-stop station.

[bobtehpanda]

 

I think the skip-stop service should be like this instead:

 

121 St - Z stops, J skips

111 St - J stops, Z skips

104 St - Z stops, J skips

Woodhaven Blvd - J stops, Z skips

85 St – Forest Parkway - Z stops, J skips

75 St – Elderts Lane - J stops, Z skips

Cypress Hills - Z stops, J skips

Crescent St - J stops, Z skips

Norwood Av - Z stops, J skips

Cleveland St - J stops, Z skips

Van Siclen Av - Z stops, J skips

Alabama Av - J stops, Z skips

Chauncey St - Z stops, J skips

Halsey St - J stops, Z skips

Gates Av - Z stops, J skips

Kosciuszko St - J stops, Z skips

 

As you can see, it's still overall the same, except that Woodhaven Blvd, Crescent St and Alabama Av are no longer "all trains stop" stations.

 

This would probably tank ridership on the and based on the omission of Woodhaven as an all-stop alone.

 

There is a reason why the and are is one of only two skip-stop operations still in place in America, and why this skip-stop operation doesn't last for a particularly long time - skip-stop is not particularly effective at reducing travel times by a significant amount without also pissing off people when trains skip their stops. A third track would probably be the easiest way to resolve problems - assuming, of course, that there are problems with the current setup.

How is it possible to construct a Queens Boulevard bypass along the LIRR tracks? You can't just build in subway connections onto the ROW and then start service. Also, an SAS service to Queens would sound like a better idea for usage of the bypass than rerouting current services.

 

You can build next to the LIRR, above the LIRR, below the LIRR. All that matters is that the property is already in the hands of the MTA (although whether or not there's enough room for an adjacent two tracks is up for debate.

 

To connect to Forest Hills, we have this wonderful new technology called a "tunnel."

[Fresh Pond]

Those "All train stops" serve as makeshift "express stations" where, if anything, riders needing a stop that was skipped can double back without going to far out.

[Armandito]

This would probably tank ridership on the and based on the omission of Woodhaven as an all-stop alone.

 

There is a reason why the and are is one of only two skip-stop operations still in place in America, and why this skip-stop operation doesn't last for a particularly long time - skip-stop is not particularly effective at reducing travel times by a significant amount without also pissing off people when trains skip their stops. A third track would probably be the easiest way to resolve problems - assuming, of course, that there are problems with the current setup.

 

 

You can build next to the LIRR, above the LIRR, below the LIRR. All that matters is that the property is already in the hands of the MTA (although whether or not there's enough room for an adjacent two tracks is up for debate.

 

To connect to Forest Hills, we have this wonderful new technology called a "tunnel."

A tunnel to the existing station, or a new level below it?

[2Line1291]

I saw somewhere it was supposed to connect with the Queens Blvd local tracks between Forest Hills and 75th St but there wasn't a Forest Hills station planned for the super express line.

[Lance]

I'm going to address a few things this time, so bear with me.

 

First off, I really wish people would stop equating skip-stop service with express service. While those trains are by definition faster than their local counterparts, that is not the primary function of the service. Skip-stop service, especially on the J and Z (and formerly on the 1 and 9), is there to improve passenger distribution throughout the line. Half of the peak-direction rush hour ridership is distributed evenly between the J and Z. Eliminating the Jamaica skip-stop and running all of those trains local will result in more crowded trains because all of the riders will pile onto the same train instead of being spread out among the J and Z depending on the stop. That's why the idea of ending skip-stop service as part of the service cuts was not revisited for the 2010 version of cuts.

 

And while we're on the subject of stations, converting Woodhaven Blvd and Crescent St from all-train stops is a terrible idea. It basically cuts rush-hour peak direction service at two of the busiest stations on the Jamaica line in half. Woodhaven is especially a bad idea because that station is a transfer point between the trains and local buses in the area.

 

On the subject of the Queens Blvd bypass, several plans were thrown about in the late '60s and beyond. Some plans called for the tracks to be built adjacent to the mainline LIRR tracks, at least one called for a tunnel, some were envisioned as a two tracked bypass while others only had it as a peak-direction one-tracked line.

 

Also, it's not as easy to build as some people here think it is.There are environmental studies that need to be done, community outreaches that have to be made, approvals from local and state officials, and so on and so forth. And that's before we get into construction proper. While there are bell-mouths for a bypass from 63rd Street, there are no such provisions on what would be the eastern end of said bypass. For example, Forest Hills would have to be rebuilt to accommodate the reentry onto the Queens Blvd tracks.

 

Finally, to address a few Second Avenue ideas. If you send a 2nd Ave service through Rutgers, you're limited to where it will terminate. You only have the Culver and Fulton St lines and while you could probably get away with sending it down Culver to facilitate express service on the viaduct, there's not much gained in such an extension. Secondly, the M is untouchable. That midtown-Myrtle service is not going anywhere any time soon, so any plan that involves sending it back to Nassau St is DOA.

 

For the record, I don't do this to be a wet blanket to everyone's ideas. I just wonder what the thought process is sometimes when it comes down to these suggestions.

[Armandito]

I'm going to address a few things this time, so bear with me.

 

First off, I really wish people would stop equating skip-stop service with express service. While those trains are by definition faster than their local counterparts, that is not the primary function of the service. Skip-stop service, especially on the J and Z (and formerly on the 1 and 9), is there to improve passenger distribution throughout the line. Half of the peak-direction rush hour ridership is distributed evenly between the J and Z. Eliminating the Jamaica skip-stop and running all of those trains local will result in more crowded trains because all of the riders will pile onto the same train instead of being spread out among the J and Z depending on the stop. That's why the idea of ending skip-stop service as part of the service cuts was not revisited for the 2010 version of cuts.

 

And while we're on the subject of stations, converting Woodhaven Blvd and Crescent St from all-train stops is a terrible idea. It basically cuts rush-hour peak direction service at two of the busiest stations on the Jamaica line in half. Woodhaven is especially a bad idea because that station is a transfer point between the trains and local buses in the area.

 

On the subject of the Queens Blvd bypass, several plans were thrown about in the late '60s and beyond. Some plans called for the tracks to be built adjacent to the mainline LIRR tracks, at least one called for a tunnel, some were envisioned as a two tracked bypass while others only had it as a peak-direction one-tracked line.

 

Also, it's not as easy to build as some people here think it is.There are environmental studies that need to be done, community outreaches that have to be made, approvals from local and state officials, and so on and so forth. And that's before we get into construction proper. While there are bell-mouths for a bypass from 63rd Street, there are no such provisions on what would be the eastern end of said bypass. For example, Forest Hills would have to be rebuilt to accommodate the reentry onto the Queens Blvd tracks.

 

Finally, to address a few Second Avenue ideas. If you send a 2nd Ave service through Rutgers, you're limited to where it will terminate. You only have the Culver and Fulton St lines and while you could probably get away with sending it down Culver to facilitate express service on the viaduct, there's not much gained in such an extension. Secondly, the M is untouchable. That midtown-Myrtle service is not going anywhere any time soon, so any plan that involves sending it back to Nassau St is DOA.

 

For the record, I don't do this to be a wet blanket to everyone's ideas. I just wonder what the thought process is sometimes when it comes down to these suggestions.

It's about time the Canarsie Line gets skip-stop service, especially since the is getting overcrowded nowadays. I think it'll be beneficial in the long run. What do you think? Edited January 14, 2015 by lara8710

[2Line1291]

It's not a wet blanket or anything but i'm positive most of everybody on here is brainstorming proposals for fun of the imagination to go wild but it's good to hear constructive input

Edited January 14, 2015 by 2Line1291

[bobtehpanda]

It's about time the Canarsie Line gets skip-stop service, especially since the is getting overcrowded nowadays. I think it'll be beneficial in the long run. What do you think?

 

The is far too busy to have skip-stop service. Passenger distribution on the Jamaica Line has very clear hub express stations with much more ridership than the rest of them, which have fairly even passenger distributions due to the really close stop spacing. The , meanwhile, has skyrocketing ridership at basically all stations due to the explosive growth in gentrifying neighborhoods along the line, so what may seem like a stop that doesn't need to be all-stop right now might not be the same way in 5 years.

 

Above a certain level of crowding, skip-stop doesn't work, because platforms get overcrowded and people get pissed off when they have to see a crowded train pass because the crowded train right behind it is the one picking up passengers at their stop. The only relief in coming years will be the eventual upgrade of power systems to add another 6 TPH, and probably boosting of service along the Jamaica Line to reduce overcrowding.

Edited January 14, 2015 by bobtehpanda

[biGC323232]

The is far too busy to have skip-stop service. Passenger distribution on the Jamaica Line has very clear hub express stations with much more ridership than the rest of them, which have fairly even passenger distributions due to the really close stop spacing. The , meanwhile, has skyrocketing ridership at basically all stations due to the explosive growth in gentrifying neighborhoods along the line, so what may seem like a stop that doesn't need to be all-stop right now might not be the same way in 5 years.

 

Above a certain level of crowding, skip-stop doesn't work, because platforms get overcrowded and people get pissed off when they have to see a crowded train pass because the crowded train right behind it is the one picking up passengers at their stop. The only relief in coming years will be the eventual upgrade of power systems to add another 6 TPH, and probably boosting of service along the Jamaica Line to reduce overcrowding.

I agree...Well said

[RollOver]

In response to those who fully disagreed with my suggestion to change Woodhaven Blvd, Crescent St, and Alabama Av from "all trains stop" to "skip-stop stations" for all the reasons they've stated, fine. Fair enough. I guess I should have thought about the major transfer points between the / skip-stop and the local buses at those 3 stations, especially Woodhaven Blvd and Alabama Av.

[MTA Dude]

The is far too busy to have skip-stop service. Passenger distribution on the Jamaica Line has very clear hub express stations with much more ridership than the rest of them, which have fairly even passenger distributions due to the really close stop spacing. The , meanwhile, has skyrocketing ridership at basically all stations due to the explosive growth in gentrifying neighborhoods along the line, so what may seem like a stop that doesn't need to be all-stop right now might not be the same way in 5 years.

 

Above a certain level of crowding, skip-stop doesn't work, because platforms get overcrowded and people get pissed off when they have to see a crowded train pass because the crowded train right behind it is the one picking up passengers at their stop. The only relief in coming years will be the eventual upgrade of power systems to add another 6 TPH, and probably boosting of service along the Jamaica Line to reduce overcrowding.

 

Not to mention the delays it will recieve from skip-stop (which I believe is also one of the reasons the was removed.

[bobtehpanda]

On the subject of the Queens Blvd bypass, several plans were thrown about in the late '60s and beyond. Some plans called for the tracks to be built adjacent to the mainline LIRR tracks, at least one called for a tunnel, some were envisioned as a two tracked bypass while others only had it as a peak-direction one-tracked line.

 

Also, it's not as easy to build as some people here think it is.There are environmental studies that need to be done, community outreaches that have to be made, approvals from local and state officials, and so on and so forth. And that's before we get into construction proper. While there are bell-mouths for a bypass from 63rd Street, there are no such provisions on what would be the eastern end of said bypass. For example, Forest Hills would have to be rebuilt to accommodate the reentry onto the Queens Blvd tracks.

 

It's certainly not easy, but it's one of the more realistic proposals that gets thrown around from time to time. At least it did have a study and alignment as recently as the 1990s. I don't recall hearing that anyone actually opposed the bypass tracks, as opposed to the other extensions proposed around that time period like the to LaGuardia.

[MTA Dude]

It's certainly not easy, but it's one of the more realistic proposals that gets thrown around from time to time. At least it did have a study and alignment as recently as the 1990s. I don't recall hearing that anyone actually opposed the bypass tracks, as opposed to the other extensions proposed around that time period like the to LaGuardia.

 

Why exactly wasn't an to LaGuardia warrented again?

[bobtehpanda]

Why exactly wasn't an to LaGuardia warrented again?

 

No one around it wanted it.

 

Basically, to do it you'd either have to split the two into a branch at Astoria Blvd/GCP, or you'd have to essentially clear a good half-block of Astoria just to make the turn. No one wanted option one, and option 2 wasn't a good thing for the neighbors for obvious reasons.

[Armandito]

The Montague Street Tunnel used to handle up to three services when the north tracks of the Manhattan Bridge were closed, and they were the , , and (in 2003, the and ran through the tunnel on weekends when the did not run to Astoria). But nowadays, much of its available capacity is unused. How can we make the tunnel's available capacity more useful? (I once proposed connecting SAS to the tunnel via the unused connection south of the Broad Street station but scrapped this idea based on feedback.)

Edited January 18, 2015 by lara8710