Department of Subways - Proposals/Ideas

[Metro CSW]

Not sure if this is a debate, or just thirst for that last word.

 

Decisions, Decisions.....

[Brooklyn]

Again, my responses are not "fantasy" far from it.

 

I gave other reasons why, but I guess you are selectively reading my posts....

 

Part of it is to simply the system and make transfers easier too.

 

I wanted the station for a transfer to the ...this could help during GOs of the line and ......I always felt that there should have been a transfer there anyway. This would give Williamsburg residents more options as well as give some riders another means of getting to Manhattan other than the or .

 

In the process, why not make Lorimer/Hewes into one station with that connection? (right on top at Union AV).

 

For Beverly and Cortelyou, just one station serving both streets....Beverly is literally a long block away from Cortelyou at this point. It doesn't make sense. In the meantime, perhaps a bigger station with more stairs.

 

I wanted a station at 7th av because of the population and a somewhat large gap between stations from 36th to 9th av. But again, that station physically might not be possible since I have posters who presented physical EVIDENCE saying why that would be problematic rather than saying "it's too expensive" not only changing the subject, but with jack to back it up.

 

 

 

 

LOL... I asked you to clarify and further elaborate on your proposal... Nothing more, nothing less. Can you do that or not?  It seems your issue is you think we just propose new stations and no one can question you on the logistics of it.  Quite frankly I still would like clarification on if this is supposed to be a fantasy thread or what.  If that's the case then fine I won't bother.  

Edited January 17, 2013 by Brooklyn

[Via Garibaldi 8]

Again, my responses are not "fantasy" far from it.

 

I gave other reasons why, but I guess you are selectively reading my posts....

 

Part of it is to simply the system and make transfers easier too.

 

I wanted the station for a transfer to the ...this could help during GOs of the line and ......I always felt that there should have been a transfer there anyway. This would give Williamsburg residents more options as well as give some riders another means of getting to Manhattan other than the or .

 

In the process, why not make Lorimer/Hewes into one station with that connection? (right on top at Union AV).

 

For Beverly and Cortelyou, just one station serving both streets....Beverly is literally a long block away from Cortelyou at this point. It doesn't make sense. In the meantime, perhaps a bigger station with more stairs.

I only questioned you about the stations... The other proposals are of no interest to me since I don't use those lines a ton.  Well I think it would be good to understand why those two stations on the currently exist since you're proposing having just one station.  I'm sure there's a good reason for it, which I don't have the answer to.

[Via Garibaldi 8]

I personally do not find 39th Street on 7th Avenue that bad...

 

- About the transfer, it is for 7th Avenue riders

- It extremely benefits 7th Avenue riders and the crowd in the vicinity

- About that "There are too many stops on the 7th Avenue Local", by the way, those stops are used much (18th Street...)

 

If 18th can work, 39th can.

lol... Why would you even have a station at 39th & 7th when the 42nd street station has an entrance one block away from 39th street at 40th & 7th?? The 18th street stop is a whole different story.  First off I used to work around there and many folks use that stop after getting off of the express at 14th.  It's there simply because of the residential and commercial places around there and it saves you from having to schlepp to 14th or 23rd street if you're right there on 18th. It also helps with overcrowding at 14th & 23rd streets.  

---

Pardon the me not using MultiQuote, but the quoting system is still messed up...

Edited January 17, 2013 by Via Garibaldi 8

[Quill Depot]

37th would be better, I see.

[MHV9218]

I personally do not find 39th Street on 7th Avenue that bad...

 

- About the transfer, it is for 7th Avenue riders

- It extremely benefits 7th Avenue riders and the crowd in the vicinity

- About that "There are too many stops on the 7th Avenue Local", by the way, those stops are used much (18th Street...)

 

If 18th can work, 39th can.

 

The TA doesn't have any interest in building stops that close together these days--more interest in getting rid of them (see the unused stations on the Lex). 18th works because of the fact that there's a school right there, the large number of residents in the area, the distance from the express above 18th, and that there aren't exits at the front and back of the station (so it doesn't really interfere with 14th/23rd). Adding a station three blocks away from one express and five blocks from another doesn't really make sense, and that area doesn't have anywhere near the number of residents and schoolkids.

[ttcsubwayfan]

Damn it, CulverExpress. You just had to bump this thread!

 

Have three beers and an internet for this comment!

[Quill Depot]

The TA doesn't have any interest in building stops that close together these days--more interest in getting rid of them (see the unused stations on the Lex). 18th works because of the fact that there's a school right there, the large number of residents in the area, the distance from the express above 18th, and that there aren't exits at the front and back of the station (so it doesn't really interfere with 14th/23rd). Adding a station three blocks away from one express and five blocks from another doesn't really make sense, and that area doesn't have anywhere near the number of residents and schoolkids.

 

And, 37th Street is Midtown, much more crowds than 18th Street. If you didn't know, the vicinity of 7th Avenue and 37th Street is a lot more dense than the vicinity of 7th Avenue and 18th Street.

[Via Garibaldi 8]

And, 37th Street is Midtown, much more crowds than 18th Street. If you didn't know, the vicinity of 7th Avenue and 37th Street is a lot more dense than the vicinity of 7th Avenue and 18th Street.

LMAO... You don't just go building stations based on density.  The 34th and 42nd street stations both have enough exits and are big enough that it makes no sense having a 37th street station.  34th street is three blocks away from 37th and the 40th & 7th entrance for 42nd street is also three blocks away.

Edited January 17, 2013 by Via Garibaldi 8

[Vistausss]

In any case, IF there really is that much demand at 37th St they *could* add an entrance/exit there for the 34th St or 42nd St station at most.

Edited January 17, 2013 by Vistausss

[checkmatechamp13]

And, 37th Street is Midtown, much more crowds than 18th Street. If you didn't know, the vicinity of 7th Avenue and 37th Street is a lot more dense than the vicinity of 7th Avenue and 18th Street.

 

Oy vey!

 

You can't be serious. Even in a fantasy world, this wouldn't work, never mind the real world.

[Quill Depot]

You people are overlooking this and seeing that because it is a few streets away from another station that it is bad. For your information, density matters. The amount of people in that area is significantly high. If it is built it will receive much ridership.

[checkmatechamp13]

You people are overlooking this and seeing that because it is a few streets away from another station that it is bad. For your information, density matters. The amount of people in that area is significantly high. If it is built it will receive much ridership.

 

But if that ridership can be accomodated by the existing stations, what's the point?

[bobtehpanda]

You people are overlooking this and seeing that because it is a few streets away from another station that it is bad. For your information, density matters. The amount of people in that area is significantly high. If it is built it will receive much ridership.

 

By this logic, buses in Manhattan should stop on every block, because there are so many people and jobs in Manhattan.

 

The effectiveness of any mode of transportation is determined by three things - frequency, speed, and convenience of stop spacing, in that order. The subway benefits heavily from the first two - frequency, and speed. No one is complaining about having to walk to 37th or 39th St, so if it ain't broke, why fix it?

 

A better thread to have would probably be "Where should we add station entrances?" IMO most subway lines have decent stop spacing, and there aren't enough stations to close to provide significant speed savings (except maybe on the J/Z skip stop). On the other hand, a lot of station entrances, passageways, and transfers that should exist don't.

[CenSin]

Why would you come on a thread devoted to such only to turn around and say that you want it, but the MTA doesn't have the money?

If cost-effectiveness were a prerequisite to all discussions, there would be no discussions. One of the enjoyable things about discussions is being able to talk about things with a few less restraints. I'm not going to shut my brain down and stop planning for my retirement simply because I don't have a job.

[Quill Depot]

But if that ridership can be accomodated by the existing stations, what's the point?

 

Have you seen the crowds at those stations, plus they are very hard to maneuver around in. This 37th Street station would have no crossovers and only an exit in the middle or so.

[Trainmaster5]

In my second feeble attempt to get this thread back on topic (getting off topic seems to be common sometimes), I will give my thoughts.

 

Forgive me if these things have been said before, but I would close down Hewes St and Lorimer St on the and put a station at Union Av to connect to the .

 

Why not put an "out of system transfer" in effect between the and lines at that location? Wouldn't it serve the same purpose without screwing up the ridership at the Hewes Street and Lorimer Street stations?

 

I would close down the Beverly and Cortelyou Rd stations and rebuild a new one in between and name it Beverly/Cortelyou Rds..

.

Unless the could acquire the properties behind the N/B and S/B station walls your new station would have the same space limitations the existing stations have only the ridership would be compressed into one station instead of two. The existing physical plant is the hurdle here because the station walls abut private property at that location. I think that's what VG8 was trying to point out. Carry on.

[bobtehpanda]

Have you seen the crowds at those stations, plus they are very hard to maneuver around in. This 37th Street station would have no crossovers and only an exit in the middle or so.

 

 

The effectiveness of any mode of transportation is determined by three things - frequency, speed, and convenience of stop spacing, in that order. The subway benefits heavily from the first two - frequency, and speed. No one is complaining about having to walk to 37th or 39th St, so if it ain't broke, why fix it and compromise speed?

[Brooklyn]

If cost-effectiveness were a prerequisite to all discussions, there would be no discussions. One of the enjoyable things about discussions is being able to talk about things with a few less restraints. I'm not going to shut my brain down and stop planning for my retirement simply because I don't have a job.

Agreed...I don't post often here, but I notice there are always a few posters (usually the same ones) who like shutting people down, and undeservedly so.

 

I could understand if someone was going off on a tangent and off the topic, but this happens when people post on-topic and relevant answers to a thread.

 

They have no relevant criticisms other than "it's too expensive" or "the MTA should do this instead"....it's frustrating.

 

Even if I were to go along with the cost argument, again, there would be no real purpose of most of the forum then. Why post here then?

 

And on top of it, they have no evidence to back themselves up (budgets, cost estimates, etc.)

[Quill Depot]

The speed of the train will not matter in that segment because the point is to get people on the train or off without running through the crowds of 42nd-TSQ or 34th Street-Penn-MSG.

[Brooklyn]

In my second feeble attempt to get this thread back on topic (getting off topic seems to be common sometimes), I will give my thoughts.

 

Forgive me if these things have been said before, but I would close down Hewes St and Lorimer St on the and put a station at Union Av to connect to the .

 

Why not put an "out of system transfer" in effect between the and lines at that location? Wouldn't it serve the same purpose without screwing up the ridership at the Hewes Street and Lorimer Street stations?

 

I would close down the Beverly and Cortelyou Rd stations and rebuild a new one in between and name it Beverly/Cortelyou Rds..

.

Unless the could acquire the properties behind the N/B and S/B station walls your new station would have the same space limitations the existing stations have only the ridership would be compressed into one station instead of two. The existing physical plant is the hurdle here because the station walls abut private property at that location. I think that's what VG8 was trying to point out. Carry on.

Partially--he was saying a lot of things lol...later on he might have hinted at this.

But to answer you, I guess that would have to be done then....usually there's going to have to be SOME property acquisition when you put in a new station, right?

[ttcsubwayfan]

The speed of the train will not matter in that segment because the point is to get people on the train or off without running through the crowds of 42nd-TSQ or 34th Street-Penn-MSG.

 

...but if the stations are busy, the trains will be, too, so anyone hoping to avoid crowds by boarding at 39th will just encounter them ON the trains. Really, there will be no gains from a 39th Street station.

[Via Garibaldi 8]

In my second feeble attempt to get this thread back on topic (getting off topic seems to be common sometimes), I will give my thoughts.

 

Forgive me if these things have been said before, but I would close down Hewes St and Lorimer St on the and put a station at Union Av to connect to the .

 

Why not put an "out of system transfer" in effect between the and lines at that location? Wouldn't it serve the same purpose without screwing up the ridership at the Hewes Street and Lorimer Street stations?

 

I would close down the Beverly and Cortelyou Rd stations and rebuild a new one in between and name it Beverly/Cortelyou Rds..

.

Unless the could acquire the properties behind the N/B and S/B station walls your new station would have the same space limitations the existing stations have only the ridership would be compressed into one station instead of two. The existing physical plant is the hurdle here because the station walls abut private property at that location. I think that's what VG8 was trying to point out. Carry on.

That was part of my point as well... Now could you shed some light on why they had Beverly and Cortelyou Rd built?

Edited January 18, 2013 by Via Garibaldi 8

[Trainmaster5]

That was part of my point as well... Now could you shed some light on why they had Beverly and Cortelyou Rd built?

 

 I seem to recall reading subway history (somewhere) that it was something to do with a real estate, neighborhood association type thing. IIRC a realtor, or group of realtors, in order to promote settlement of the area came up with a deal with the BRT to put stations in the area. It's possible that the real estate speculators were also speculators in the BRT, too so a little quid pro quo was probably part of the deal. The Brighton line itself was mainly casual line taking riders to the Sheepshead Bay Race Track and Coney Island proper and not built as a commuter line per se. It was only when the real estate people got the area south of Church Avenue populated enough that the line became the commuter line we have today. That's also why the station and street were renamed Beverley Road, unlike the IRT station which still has the original name of Beverly Road. Now that I think about it I think it was a Brooklyn neighborhood history book where I saw that information originally. When the Brighton line stations were lengthened in the late 50's early 60's era the distance between the station platforms became closer. I really don't know why one of the stations wasn't closed at that time but it probably had something to do with real estate values. Location, location, location, right? Proximity to a subway station has got to be a selling point in a residential area. Even in my childhood days that area was like a little city that was isolated from Flatbush itself.

[Quill Depot]

...but if the stations are busy, the trains will be, too, so anyone hoping to avoid crowds by boarding at 39th will just encounter them ON the trains. Really, there will be no gains from a 39th Street station.

 

...I am talking about the complex... It is hard to maneuver through.

 

 

Avenue O,

Avenue Y-X,