Department of Subways - Proposals/Ideas

[T to Dyre Avenue]

Short turning Js at Broadway Jct would leave stations east of there with less service, something they need badly seeing as with skip stop, they're already only getting 6tph. To add 4th av service, I'd just extend the south to 95th, 9th, Bay Parkway or 86th (whichever is most efficient, and given more cars of course).

Sorry...I meant run the short-turn trains in addition to the existing and service, so as not to leave the stations east of the Junction with less service. They should probably have a different letter, like K, so as not to cause confusion with the skip-stop / .

 

Extending the to Bay Ridge would certainly help out the as well, but would have to wait for the R211s to enter service.

Edited June 17, 2017 by T to Dyre Avenue

[RR503]

Instead of building the to terminate at Hanover Square, why not merge it with the Jamaica Line on Broad Street and use Montague to service 4th Av?

You could do that, but a) the engineering of a 2nd ave-nassau connection is difficult (see 2av thread -- ppl have posted about it) and b) doing so limits you to ~18tph from 2nd ave to Brooklyn. If we're looking solely in terms of impact on Brooklyn service, building a connection to the Fulton St local tracks via Court Street gets you the biggest bang for your buck. 

 

Sorry...I meant run the short-turn trains in addition to the existing and service, so as not to leave the stations east of the Junction with less service. They should probably have a different letter, like K, so as not to cause confusion with the skip-stop / .

 

Extending the to Bay Ridge would certainly help out the as well, but would have to wait for the R211s to enter service.

 

Problem is, the Williamsburg Bridge can only do 24tph. and run 12 together, and the runs 9ish for a total of 21. Do you really want a new service with ~3tph? I'm all for s down 4th in theory, but you have to consider route length. 

[BreeddekalbL]

You could do that, but a) the engineering of a 2nd ave-nassau connection is difficult (see 2av thread -- ppl have posted about it) and b) doing so limits you to ~18tph from 2nd ave to Brooklyn. If we're looking solely in terms of impact on Brooklyn service, building a connection to the Fulton St local tracks via Court Street gets you the biggest bang for your buck. 

 

if that's the case what happens to the museum?

[LongLiveRock]

The problem with sending the to Bay Ridge is you wind up having to deadhead trains from CI Yard to Bay Ridge somehow, which would both waste time and disrupt service. Perhaps a permanent terminal of Kings Hwy or 86th-Gravesend on Sea Beach would work, though that could be a messy merge after 59th... 

 

Alternatively, you could send it down West End, but Sea Beach needs the extra service more (based on ridership), and since trains are run with crews, I'm sure logistically running it down Sea Beach makes more sense. Also 45th and 53rd are high ridership stations that could use some extra service (especially when 53rd re-opens). 

[RR503]

if that's the case what happens to the museum?

 

I would suggest one of the abandoned platforms along the Nassau St. Line or the lower level of 9th Ave. 

 

The problem with sending the to Bay Ridge is you wind up having to deadhead trains from CI Yard to Bay Ridge somehow, which would both waste time and disrupt service. Perhaps a permanent terminal of Kings Hwy or 86th-Gravesend on Sea Beach would work, though that could be a messy merge after 59th... 

 

Alternatively, you could send it down West End, but Sea Beach needs the extra service more (based on ridership), and since trains are run with crews, I'm sure logistically running it down Sea Beach makes more sense. Also 45th and 53rd are high ridership stations that could use some extra service (especially when 53rd re-opens). 

 

Agreed. I doubt the merge could be much worse than Prince or 42nd on Broadway though. 

[Fresh Pond]

 

 

I would suggest one of the abandoned platforms along the Nassau St. Line or the lower level of 9th Ave.

If I had a dollar someone threw out Nassau as an alternative, I would fund phase 2 of SAS myself lol

[RR503]

If I had a dollar someone threw out Nassau as an alternative, I would fund phase 2 of SAS myself lol

As would I, but seeing as that wasn't what I was suggesting, joke's on you!

[Porter]

Instead of building the to terminate at Hanover Square, why not merge it with the Jamaica Line on Broad Street and use Montague to service 4th Av?

 

I'd support that. It sounds less expensive than building Seaport and Hanover Square stations, both of which being located in very dense, confined, and delicate areas. At any rate, the Nassau Line needs to be seriously rethought; its current layout is obsolete and a waste of space.

[Around the Horn]

I'd support that. It sounds less expensive than building Seaport and Hanover Square stations, both of which being located in very dense, confined, and delicate areas. At any rate, the Nassau Line needs to be seriously rethought; its current layout is obsolete and a waste of space.

 

It would probably cost more to retrofit Nassau and build a connection to it than it would to build the Water Street option.

[RR503]

Definitely would -- they studied it. I think they have it in one of the EISs.

Edited June 19, 2017 by RR503

[Porter]

Perhaps, but it would also help the Nassau Line to have some renovations.

[Lance]

One does not preclude the other. Nassau St does not need service from Second Ave to get those station and line rehabs.

 

Besides, the proposed Water St alignment provides service to an area that currently does not have any subway service, whereas the Nassau St alignment serves an area that's practically over-saturated with subway service. Along with the Nassau St line, there are the lower portions of the 7th Avenue and Lexington Ave lines providing service in the Financial District. I don't believe a line from Second Ave will be that beneficial, even with the population growth in Lower Manhattan.

 

Another thing to consider is the terminus of this potential service. Would it terminate at Chambers St or Broad St in Manhattan or would it run to some point in Brooklyn? If it terminates in Manhattan, all it has in its favor is a relatively easy terminal that doesn't require much new construction beyond Delancey St. If it were to run into Brooklyn via the Montague St tunnels, it would undoubtedly run into the mess that is DeKalb Ave junction. It would not be impossible to run a 2nd Avenue - Montague - South Brooklyn route, but unless some major construction is done in that area, the train holds approaching DeKalb Av would only get worse as this new service mixes with the existing Broadway and 6th Avenue services.

[Wallyhorse]

One does not preclude the other. Nassau St does not need service from Second Ave to get those station and line rehabs.

 

Besides, the proposed Water St alignment provides service to an area that currently does not have any subway service, whereas the Nassau St alignment serves an area that's practically over-saturated with subway service. Along with the Nassau St line, there are the lower portions of the 7th Avenue and Lexington Ave lines providing service in the Financial District. I don't believe a line from Second Ave will be that beneficial, even with the population growth in Lower Manhattan.

 

Another thing to consider is the terminus of this potential service. Would it terminate at Chambers St or Broad St in Manhattan or would it run to some point in Brooklyn? If it terminates in Manhattan, all it has in its favor is a relatively easy terminal that doesn't require much new construction beyond Delancey St. If it were to run into Brooklyn via the Montague St tunnels, it would undoubtedly run into the mess that is DeKalb Ave junction. It would not be impossible to run a 2nd Avenue - Montague - South Brooklyn route, but unless some major construction is done in that area, the train holds approaching DeKalb Av would only get worse as this new service mixes with the existing Broadway and 6th Avenue services.

Which as much as I would like to see a Nassau connection done, Water Street is more important, especially if from there it can proceed to Brooklyn via a new Schermerhorn Street tunnel that connects such to the Fulton line. 

[2Line1291]

Quality over Quantity, the Second Ave Line is better off being built along Water St and a future extension to Brooklyn via an Atlantic Ave Tunnel. Like Wallyhorse said, and 2nd Ave service along Fulton Ave Local and in my opinion the other one going down Culver Express and local south of Church Av. So far as DeKalb Junction goes, I understand the wonderful perks of flexing our subway services but I'm just looking at DeKalb and see trains flows better down 4th Ave Seach Beach and West End, while trains flows better down Brighton.

[Around the Horn]

Quality over Quantity, the Second Ave Line is better off being built along Water St and a future extension to Brooklyn via an Atlantic Ave Tunnel. Like Wallyhorse said, and 2nd Ave service along Fulton Ave Local and in my opinion the other one going down Culver Express and local south of Church Av. So far as DeKalb Junction goes, I understand the wonderful perks of flexing our subway services but I'm just looking at DeKalb and see trains flows better down 4th Ave Seach Beach and West End, while trains flows better down Brighton.

LOL 6 Avenue on West End/Sea Beach and Broadway on Brighton, would be an absolute disaster.

[Deucey]

Quality over Quantity, the Second Ave Line is better off being built along Water St and a future extension to Brooklyn via an Atlantic Ave Tunnel. Like Wallyhorse said, and 2nd Ave service along Fulton Ave Local and in my opinion the other one going down Culver Express and local south of Church Av. So far as DeKalb Junction goes, I understand the wonderful perks of flexing our subway services but I'm just looking at DeKalb and see trains flows better down 4th Ave Seach Beach and West End, while trains flows better down Brighton.

You mean this tunnel? https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cobble_Hill_Tunnel

[2Line1291]

@Deucey I learned something new tonight

LOL 6 Avenue on West End/Sea Beach and Broadway on Brighton, would be an absolute disaster.

How so? I have a sense of where you coming though

[Around the Horn]

@Deucey I learned something new tonight

How so? I have a sense of where you coming though

 

Well, first off there's now no way for passengers from 4th Avenue to Broadway to catch an express train without walking through the transfer tunnel at Atlantic, and the same for 6th Avenue from Brighton, as the 4th Avenue express tracks lead directly to the DeKalb bypass (and the only switch from the express to the local to stop at DeKalb has a 5MPH speed limit enforced by wheel detector IIRC).

 

And because of all that, you've now turned Atlantic into a madhouse.

[Porter]

Even if the SAS were to reach Hanover Square (will any of us be alive?), couldn't it connect to the Montague Tunnel anyway without passing through any Nassau Line stations? That tunnel is underutilized and it's not worth the money to build a new one.

[Around the Horn]

Even if the SAS were to reach Hanover Square (will any of us be alive?), couldn't it connect to the Montague Tunnel anyway without passing through any Nassau Line stations? That tunnel is underutilized and it's not worth the money to build a new one.

 

I think there are unused bellmouths, but I'm not sure if they are on the right side of the tracks for a connection to Water Street. The problem with that is that you are forced to go through the crowded DeKalb junction, unless you build an expensive junction in Downtown Brooklyn.

[Porter]

I think there are unused bellmouths, but I'm not sure if they are on the right side of the tracks for a connection to Water Street. The problem with that is that you are forced to go through the crowded DeKalb junction, unless you build an expensive junction in Downtown Brooklyn.

 

That sounds more feasible and reasonable than building a dedicated tunnel, to be honest. A new bellmouth can be appended if need be.

[Lance]

It's possible. It would just become a matter of where to send this hypothetical service. 4th Avenue, the local tracks specifically, is the only South Brooklyn line that could use more service. Running this service anywhere else would likely just add more service where it is not needed. Of course, we're looking at this from a present perspective. Who knows how ridership patterns will be in the 22nd century?

 

To respond to another suggestion, shifting the to the Sea Beach in favor of the as a Brighton line is a terrible idea. This not only ignores the ridership of the Brighton line entirely, which enjoys 19/5 6th Avenue service along with full-time Broadway service. It also ignores off-hours riders on the Sea Beach line while skewering service over to the Brighton needlessly. Unless Transit were to run train service at all times between Manhattan and Brooklyn, service along Sea Beach would once again be relegated to a shuttle with riders forced to transfer to the and for continuing service.

 

This issue also manifests itself on the Brighton line because both the and are considered primary lines currently and would likely remain so, even if they both were to share the Brighton line with one running to Astoria and the other to the Upper East Side. That means Brighton riders will see two services that run between Manhattan and Brooklyn at all times, including late nights while Sea Beach riders would have none. I cannot see how riders would accept such an idea. The present setup is not perfect, but it is much better than the post-Chrystie/Manhattan Bridge construction service revival that's being proposed here.

[bobtehpanda]

That sounds more feasible and reasonable than building a dedicated tunnel, to be honest. A new bellmouth can be appended if need be.

 

It really isn't. The brand new tunnel makes sense because it allows you to fully utilize SAS's capacity, whereas using Montague caps southern SAS capacity at DeKalb's remaining capacity, which isn't a whole lot. Building a tunnel under a whole lot of nothing (the river) is also a lot cheaper than trying to weave additional capacity in and out of DeKalb; if that was feasible, then they would have done it during the countless modifications to DeKalb in the past.

[kirvn]

(this one is really far out there)

(Y) B Division - Kingsbridge Rd, Southern Blvd, Cross Bronx/Whitestone Expwys via Whitestone Bridge, Kissena Blvd, Parsons Blvd

Runs R143 cars, CBTC ready

Based in Van Cortlandt Yard, expanded with second level for B division cards

Stations

 

Bronx

-231 St (@Broadway) - , Bx1, Bx7, Bx9, Bx10, Bx20

Manhattan

-225 St (@ Broadway) - , Bx7, Bx9 [note: positioned slightly north of platforms to allow for turn onto 225 St]

Bronx

-Bailey-Heath Avs (@Kingsbridge Rd) - Bx9

-University Ave (@Kingsbridge Rd) - Bx3, Bx9, Bx32, potential University Ave Subway

-Jerome Ave (@Kingsbridge Rd) - , Bx9, Bx32 [to be eliminated if Jerome El is replaced with University Av Subway]

-Grand Concourse (@Kingsbridge Rd) - , , Bx1/2, Bx9, Bx22, Bx28

-Fordham Plaza (@Webster Av/Fordham Rd) - Bx9, Bx12 SBS, Bx15 LTD, Bx17, Bx22, Bx41 SBS, W60, W61, W62, potential Third Ave Subway

-Arthur Ave (@Fordham Rd) - Bx9, Bx12 SBS, Bx17, Bx22, W60, W61, W62

-182 St - Bronx Zoo (@Southern Blvd) - Bx9, Bx19

-West Farms Square - Tremont Ave - , , Bx9, Bx21, Bx36, Bx40, Bx42, Q44 SBS

-Rosedale Ave (@Cross Bronx Expy) - Bx36, Q44 SBS

-Parkchester - , Bx4, Bx4A, Bx36, Bx39, Q44 SBS

-Castle Hill Ave (@Cross Bronx Expy) - Bx22, Q44 SBS

-Lafayette Ave (@Hutchinson Pkwy) - Q44 SBS, Q50

Queens

-20 Ave (@Whitestone Expy) - Q20A, Q50

-Linden Pl (@Whitestone Expy) - Q25, Q50

-Roosevelt Ave (@Main St) - , Flushing Bus Terminal

-Franklin Ave (@Kissena Blvd) - Q17, Q25, Q27, Q34

-Holly Ave (@Kissena Blvd) - Q17, Q25, Q27, Q34

-Horace Harding Expy (@Kissena Blvd) - Q17, Q25, Q34, Q88

-Jewel Ave (@Kissena Blvd) - Q25, Q34, Q64

-73 Ave (@Kissena Blvd) - Q25, Q34

-Union Tpke (@Parsons Blvd) - Q25, Q34, Q46

-Jamaica Ave (@Parsons Blvd) - , Q25, Q34, Q43, Q65

-Jamaica Center - Parsons/Archer - , , , Jamaica Bus Terminal, JFK Airtrain[Airtrain Extended]

 

[engineerboy6561]

(this one is really far out there)

(Y) B Division - Kingsbridge Rd, Southern Blvd, Cross Bronx/Whitestone Expwys via Whitestone Bridge, Kissena Blvd, Parsons Blvd

That's interesting, but I think it might be better to combine that with the QueensRail proposal. My idea would be to run the (Y) from Bay Plaza to Beach 116 St, making the following stops:

 

Bay Plaza- Bx12SBS, Bx23

Pelham Bay Park Bx5, Bx12SBS, Bx23, Bx24, Bx29, Q50

Country Club Rd Bx5, Bx24, Q50

Lafayette Av Q44SBS, Q50

 

14 Av/Parsons Bl Q44SBS

20 Av/Parsons Bl Q20A, Q20B, Q44SBS

Willets Pt Bl/Parsons Bl Q20A, Q20B, Q34, Q44SBS

Bayside Av/ Union St Q16, Q20A, Q20B, Q44SBS

Flushing Main St , all Flushing bus routes

Queens Botanical Garden Q20A, Q20B, Q44SBS

Booth Memorial Av/Queens Hospital Q20A, Q20B, Q44SBS

Horace Harding Av/Main St Q20A, Q20B, Q44SBS, Q88

Melbourne Av/Main St Q20A, Q20B, Q44SBS

Jewel Av/Main St Q20A, Q20B, Q44SBS, Q64, QM4

Jewel Av/Grand Central Pkwy Q64, QM4

Queens Blvd/Jewel Av at 71 Av, Q23, Q60, Q64

Dartmouth St/Yellowstone Blvd  QM12, QM42

Yellowstone Blvd/Alderton St QM12, QM42

Metropolitan Av Q11, Q21, Q23, Q52, Q53, Q54, QM12, QM42

Union Tpke Q11, Q21, Q23, QM12, QM42

Myrtle Av Q11, Q21, Q23, Q52, Q53, Q55

Jamaica Av at 104 St, Q56

Atlantic Av Q24

Liberty Av at 104 St, Q7, Q41, Q102

Aqueduct Racetrack

Aqueduct-North Conduit Av

Howard Beach/JFK Airport Airtrain

Broad Channel

Beach 90 St

Beach 98 St

Beach 105 St

Beach 116 St

 

As far as the Bronx stuff is concerned, extend the one stop to Bay Plaza, then run the along Fordham Rd to Sedgwick Av before connecting to the at Dyckman and running to South Ferry. Have the stop at

 

Bay Plaza (Y)

Eastchester Rd/Pelham Pkwy 

Esplanade/Pelham Pkwy

White Plains Rd/Pelham Pkwy

Southern Blvd/Fordham Rd

Fordham Plaza

Morris Av/Fordham Rd (connection between Concourse and Jerome lines via platform)

Sedgwick Av/Fordham Rd

Dyckman St, then all stops to South Ferry

 

I made these suggestions because running the (Y) from Bay Plaza to Queens (basing it out of Rockaway Park and Jamaica Yards, Jamaica accessible via a track connection to the yard leads at 71 Av) would effectively replace the Q44SBS north of Jewel Av and take most of the traffic off the Q53 bus south of Metropolitan. It would wind up dramatically reducing loads on the Q50 as well, and would finally give Co-Op City subway access. You'd also wind up creating a link between the Queens Blvd, Rockaway, and Jamaica El lines on a preexisting ROW the way the QueensRail plan would, but without the inconvenience of having a shuttle line or the operational risks of extending the or any further on the northeast end.

 

Adding a 7 Av service on Fordham Rd/Pelham Pkwy (and splitting the TPH evenly with the 1 train) should take most of the load off the Bx12SBS, and allow for greater flexibility for people coming in from the North Bronx. The connection to the Concourse line at Grand Concourse should allow for load shifting off the Dyre and WPR lines onto Concourse IND trains, thus reducing some of the crush loading on the WPR.

Edited June 22, 2017 by engineerboy6561