Department of Subways - Proposals/Ideas

[RR503]

16 minutes ago, T to Dyre Avenue said:

What about Essex is basically already done?

There are already 2 tracks accessible from the bridge exit, mitigating the curve/dwell issue. 

[LGA Link N Train]

15 minutes ago, RR503 said:

There are already 2 tracks accessible from the bridge exit, mitigating the curve/dwell issue. 

Under the scenario that the current Northbound track was abandoned (and if the northbound platform was extended), the assumption that weekend  service was permanent to 96th Street or Queens, and we were left with only operating the 2 tracks that directly access the bridge (the middle and southbound tracks), would we be able to speed up  service or no? 

[RR503]

6 minutes ago, LaGuardia Link N Tra said:

Under the scenario that the current Northbound track was abandoned (and if the northbound platform was extended), the assumption that weekend  service was permanent to 96th Street or Queens, and we were left with only operating the 2 tracks that directly access the bridge (the middle and southbound tracks), would we be able to speed up  service or no? 

Yes. Issue is the sharpness of the curve onto the northern track, which you’re abandoning here. 

Edited January 28, 2019 by RR503

[Derrick Tan]

Has anyone mentioned a Horace Harding Expressway Line? If not, here's my idea for a Horace Harding Expressway Line to extend subway service through central and east Queens. This is pure fiction and obviously won't be built or planned by the MTA.

In this plan,  service would be brought back to run its original route from 2nd Avenue until Woodhaven Boulevard, the line will connect to a 3-track subway tunnel running under the Horace Harding Expressway to Little Neck Parkway. The  will still be part of Sixth Avenue Line and the QBL, and future extentions and transfers will be referenced. Here are the stops:

2nd Avenue -

Broadway-Lafayette Street - , transfer to

West 4th Street-Washington Square - , transfer to  

14th Street - , transfer to

23rd Street - 

34th Street-Herald Square - , transfer to  

42nd Street-Bryant Park - , transfer to [42nd] 

47th-50th Streets-Rockefeller Center - 

Fifth Avenue-53rd Street - 

Lexington Avenue-53rd Street - , transfer to

Court Square-23rd Street - , transfer to

Queens Plaza - , transfer to  

36th Street - 

Steinway Street - 

46th Street - 

Northern Boulevard - 

65th Street - 

Jackson Heights Roosevelt Avenue - , transfer to  

Elmhurst Avenue - 

Grand Avenue-Newtown - (R)

Woodhaven Boulevard [converted to express station] - (E)(F)(M)(R)

====[2 tracks to be built after the stop and spur under the Horace Harding Expressway from the QBL]====

108th Street [local]

College Point Boulevard-Van Wyck Expressway [local]

Main Street [express station; two island platforms with center track for rush hour peak express]\

Kissena Boulevard [express]

164th Street [local]

Utopia Parkway [express]

188th Street [local]

Francis Lewis Boulevard [local]

Oceania Street [local]

Springfield Boulevard [express]

East Hampton Boulevard-Cross Island Parkway [local]

Douglaston Parkway [local]

Marathon Parkway [local]

Little Neck Parkway [three-track terminal]

 

Streets are based on convenient street intersections on the Horace Harding Expressway service road, express/local stations are determined by amount of available bus transfers. Also, this is built assuming budget can afford all this construction and that it can push toward completion quickly.

 

[bobtehpanda]

As a former resident of eastern Queens, let me just say this; there is no need to extend any subway line east of Springfield or Bell. The county line is a 10-15 minute bus trip from those streets, it would be massive overkill. And HHE is particularly egregious in how little there could be around the stations; where are your passengers going to come from, Douglaston Plaza?

[Union Tpke]

33 minutes ago, bobtehpanda said:

As a former resident of eastern Queens, let me just say this; there is no need to extend any subway line east of Springfield or Bell. The county line is a 10-15 minute bus trip from those streets, it would be massive overkill. And HHE is particularly egregious in how little there could be around the stations; where are your passengers going to come from, Douglaston Plaza?

I have an interesting plan concerning Hillside that I plan on posting at some point.

[T to Dyre Avenue]

18 hours ago, Derrick Tan said:

Has anyone mentioned a Horace Harding Expressway Line? If not, here's my idea for a Horace Harding Expressway Line to extend subway service through central and east Queens. This is pure fiction and obviously won't be built or planned by the MTA.

In this plan,  service would be brought back to run its original route from 2nd Avenue until Woodhaven Boulevard, the line will connect to a 3-track subway tunnel running under the Horace Harding Expressway to Little Neck Parkway. The  will still be part of Sixth Avenue Line and the QBL, and future extentions and transfers will be referenced.

...

Streets are based on convenient street intersections on the Horace Harding Expressway service road, express/local stations are determined by amount of available bus transfers. Also, this is built assuming budget can afford all this construction and that it can push toward completion quickly.

Let me just say that I’m definitely in favor of having a subway line located somewhere in between the  and the . Horace Harding Expressway is roughly midway between both at Main St (the  station of the same name and Briarwood on the ). But I’d be more in favor of bringing back the V as a service on 2nd Avenue. I firmly believe the 2nd Avenue Subway should not have only one service south of the 63rd Street Tunnel. Having three 6th Ave local services coming from QBL is a bit of an overkill. Also frequency of this V service would be severely limited by having to share with the  and  in Queens and the  and  in Manhattan. Maybe if you move the  to Astoria (which in turn would displace the  to the SAS north of 63rd), then you’d be able to run this V service on more acceptable headways.

With regards to locating subway on Horace Harding, in order for it to truly be effective and user-friendly, it would need to be located off to one side, perhaps running below one of the service roads, which would likely require a stacked tunnel with platforms for both directions on the same side, one above the other. That would require there to be only two tracks instead of three, but there really is no need for three, since the V would be sharing tracks with the  on QBL, the  in 63rd Street and the  on 2nd Avenue.

Edited February 1, 2019 by T to Dyre Avenue

[bobtehpanda]

4 hours ago, T to Dyre Avenue said:

Let me just say that I’m definitely in favor of having a subway line located somewhere in between the  and the . Horace Harding Expressway is roughly midway between both at Main St (the  station of the same name and Briarwood on the ). But I’d be more in favor of bringing back the V as a service on 2nd Avenue. I firmly believe the 2nd Avenue Subway should not have only one service south of the 63rd Street Tunnel. Having three 6th Ave local services coming from QBL is a bit of an overkill. Also frequency of this V service would be severely limited by having to share with the  and  in Queens and the  and  in Manhattan. Maybe if you move the  to Astoria (which in turn would displace the  to the SAS north of 63rd), then you’d be able to run this V service on more acceptable headways.

With regards to locating subway on Horace Harding, in order for it to truly be effective and user-friendly, it would need to be located off to one side, perhaps running below one of the service roads, which would likely require a stacked tunnel with platforms for both directions on the same side, one above the other. That would require there to be only two tracks instead of three, but there really is no need for three, since the V would be sharing tracks with the  on QBL, the  in 63rd Street and the  on 2nd Avenue.

I think that HHE is wildly overrated partially because the divergent point requires sending some local service, but not all of it. Nothing fronts the HHE, everything is a bit inconvenient to access from it, especially if you consider the fact that some of the people using the station will have to cross active on and off ramps. And of course this is before considering how difficult it would be to build.

As far as a mid-Queens route goes, if you were to build one I would actually prefer extending the Queens Blvd local to 188 via Jewel and 73rd. Stops at Main, Kissena, 164, Utopia, and 188.

Edited February 2, 2019 by bobtehpanda

[RR503]

1 hour ago, bobtehpanda said:

I think that HHE is wildly overrated partially because the divergent point requires sending some local service, but not all of it. Nothing fronts the HHE, everything is a bit inconvenient to access from it, especially if you consider the fact that some of the people using the station will have to cross active on and off ramps. And of course this is before considering how difficult it would be to build.

As far as a mid-Queens route goes, if you were to build one I would actually prefer extending the Queens Blvd local to 188 via Jewel and 73rd. Stops at Main, Kissena, 164, Utopia, and 188.

We've been through this before. Provided it's done as a Bypass branch and not as a local branch, running the line along as an el is totally doable. 

The route itself, too, isn't as bad as you're making it out to be. It bisects density really well, hits Fresh Meadows, QC, etc, and can draw easily from bus corridors. Is it as good as Jewel or Union Tpk? No. But I think the cost/benefit works out. 

Edited February 2, 2019 by RR503

[bobtehpanda]

3 minutes ago, RR503 said:

We've been through this before. Provided it's done as a Bypass branch and not as a local branch, running the line along as an el is totally doable. 

The route itself, too, isn't as bad as you're making it out to be. It bisects density really well, hits Fresh Meadows, QC, etc, and can draw easily from bus corridors. Is it as good as Jewel or Union Tpk? No. But I think the cost/benefit works out. 

The actual local density around stations is atrocious, though. On the northern side, it's only three or four blocks before you hit Kissena Corridor Park, and an entire quarter of the walkshed at 164th is a graveyard.

Honestly, I see light rail as the solution for Union. Light rail from LIJ to Kew Gardens and then down to Kennedy, replacing the Q46 and Q10.

[SuperDonut]

51 minutes ago, bobtehpanda said:

The actual local density around stations is atrocious, though. On the northern side, it's only three or four blocks before you hit Kissena Corridor Park, and an entire quarter of the walkshed at 164th is a graveyard.

Honestly, I see light rail as the solution for Union. Light rail from LIJ to Kew Gardens and then down to Kennedy, replacing the Q46 and Q10.

When it comes to lower density areas, buses and light rail are king. I don’t understand why NYC is so allergic to light rail. It’s so much cheaper and quieter and less likely to get public pushback.

[bobtehpanda]

5 hours ago, SuperDonut said:

When it comes to lower density areas, buses and light rail are king. I don’t understand why NYC is so allergic to light rail. It’s so much cheaper and quieter and less likely to get public pushback.

To be fair, in New York there are very few corridors eligible for light rail that aren't either logical subway extensions (Nostrand, Utica, Hillside, eastward 7, 3rd Av in the Bronx) or parallel to existing heavy rail corridors (Triboro RX, Woodhaven)

Union Turnpike and Lefferts Blvd are one of the few radial corridors that make sense for light rail, because there is no logical way to shoehorn subway lines from those streets into existing trunks.

Edited February 2, 2019 by bobtehpanda

[engineerboy6561]

12 hours ago, bobtehpanda said:

I think that HHE is wildly overrated partially because the divergent point requires sending some local service, but not all of it. Nothing fronts the HHE, everything is a bit inconvenient to access from it, especially if you consider the fact that some of the people using the station will have to cross active on and off ramps. And of course this is before considering how difficult it would be to build.

As far as a mid-Queens route goes, if you were to build one I would actually prefer extending the Queens Blvd local to 188 via Jewel and 73rd. Stops at Main, Kissena, 164, Utopia, and 188.

What about if instead of building HHE as a local split off of the QBL we built a new line along 495/Flushing Av/Metropolitan Av and connected it to the Second Ave Subway around Houston St?

[Derrick Tan]

17 hours ago, bobtehpanda said:

I think that HHE is wildly overrated partially because the divergent point requires sending some local service, but not all of it. Nothing fronts the HHE, everything is a bit inconvenient to access from it, especially if you consider the fact that some of the people using the station will have to cross active on and off ramps. And of course this is before considering how difficult it would be to build.

As far as a mid-Queens route goes, if you were to build one I would actually prefer extending the Queens Blvd local to 188 via Jewel and 73rd. Stops at Main, Kissena, 164, Utopia, and 188.

I didn't think the HHE extension through so I appreciate the feedback. An extension via Jewel and 73rd is a great alternative to building a line to east Queens but that would also be difficult as that means that 73rd Avenue and Jewel Avenue have to be widened and the same with the sidewalk to fit entrances and tunnels.

[Derrick Tan]

Probably the plan to extend the  to Springfield Boulevard via Hillside Avenue is also feasible

[bobtehpanda]

6 hours ago, engineerboy6561 said:

What about if instead of building HHE as a local split off of the QBL we built a new line along 495/Flushing Av/Metropolitan Av and connected it to the Second Ave Subway around Houston St?

I would not support the redevelopment of one of the last industrial areas left in New York, and the subway extension wouldn't be feasible without it. Also, most people are trying to go to Midtown. Hard pass.

[RR503]

13 hours ago, bobtehpanda said:

To be fair, in New York there are very few corridors eligible for light rail that aren't either logical subway extensions (Nostrand, Utica, Hillside, eastward 7, 3rd Av in the Bronx) or parallel to existing heavy rail corridors (Triboro RX, Woodhaven)

Union Turnpike and Lefferts Blvd are one of the few radial corridors that make sense for light rail, because there is no logical way to shoehorn subway lines from those streets into existing trunks.

Density by census block group, broken into deciles. Black = LIE, blue = Jewel, green = Union Tpk. 

This pretty much speaks for itself, but take a good look at the Lefrak area, and keep in mind that the low density area just east of Flushing Meadows is QC, which I'd imagine would be quite the ridership draw.

Now, you're right that highway-running transit isn't as friendly to development as routes under normal roads, but I frankly see this as an opportunity to change that. A lot of the LIE in that stretch is sunken in cuts -- given that we're already constructing an AirTrain style el, why not just deck over some sections? Make a park or, more housing. 

Again, I think Jewel is, all else, equal, a better route (maybe lower density than LIE, but walkshed contains more developable land), but the cost, IMO swings this in favor of LIE. 

[LGA Link N Train]

2 hours ago, RR503 said:

Density by census block group, broken into deciles. Black = LIE, blue = Jewel, green = Union Tpk. 

This pretty much speaks for itself, but take a good look at the Lefrak area, and keep in mind that the low density area just east of Flushing Meadows is QC, which I'd imagine would be quite the ridership draw.

Now, you're right that highway-running transit isn't as friendly to development as routes under normal roads, but I frankly see this as an opportunity to change that. A lot of the LIE in that stretch is sunken in cuts -- given that we're already constructing an AirTrain style el, why not just deck over some sections? Make a park or, more housing. 

Again, I think Jewel is, all else, equal, a better route (maybe lower density than LIE, but walkshed contains more developable land), but the cost, IMO swings this in favor of LIE. 

Out of these 3 options, I feel like Jewel Avenue is the superior option to build a subway line here. LIE has potential, but I’m going to agree with @bobtehpanda mainly because a transit-Highway corridor won’t be as development friendly as we hope and also that certain areas would be difficult to access. With the Jewel Avenue Line, we don’t have these issues and it looks like it can be easily developed. The downside for both options is that construction of the Junctions to allow trains to access either of these 2 corridors would not be easy whatsoever. Not only that, but in my opinion, if a QB Local route were to take either of these 2 corridors, they’ll have to terminate in Manhattan so that they don’t risk being a delay prone route. (Like The  and  lines) 

 

[RR503]

55 minutes ago, LaGuardia Link N Tra said:

Out of these 3 options, I feel like Jewel Avenue is the superior option to build a subway line here. LIE has potential, but I’m going to agree with @bobtehpanda mainly because a transit-Highway corridor won’t be as development friendly as we hope and also that certain areas would be difficult to access. With the Jewel Avenue Line, we don’t have these issues and it looks like it can be easily developed. The downside for both options is that construction of the Junctions to allow trains to access either of these 2 corridors would not be easy whatsoever. Not only that, but in my opinion, if a QB Local route were to take either of these 2 corridors, they’ll have to terminate in Manhattan so that they don’t risk being a delay prone route. (Like The  and  lines) 

Unless you're a really badly run railroad, length doesn't have much of an impact on delays. 

If we're pulling from QB local, Jewel is the way to go -- beyond cutting service to 63 and 67, you're forced to tunnel under the marshes. LIE only works if its paired with a bypass on the LIRR ROW, as that allows you to just run an el down the LIE median the whole way. 

Again, LIE can be combined with a larger effort to make the LIE more friendly to the neighborhoods around it -- and I can all but guarantee you that this'll be cheaper than tunneling down Jewel. You've gotta thing cost/benefit with these things. 

[bobtehpanda]

14 minutes ago, RR503 said:

Unless you're a really badly run railroad, length doesn't have much of an impact on delays. 

If we're pulling from QB local, Jewel is the way to go -- beyond cutting service to 63 and 67, you're forced to tunnel under the marshes. LIE only works if its paired with a bypass on the LIRR ROW, as that allows you to just run an el down the LIE median the whole way. 

Again, LIE can be combined with a larger effort to make the LIE more friendly to the neighborhoods around it -- and I can all but guarantee you that this'll be cheaper than tunneling down Jewel. You've gotta thing cost/benefit with these things. 

If you were to even run an el down the LIE (which opens up old wounds that weren't present with AirTrain JFK construction, like how Nassau has always wanted the HOV extended through to the QMT), where would you even put a subway-elevated connection? Corona Park isn't an option given both NIMBYism (extremely strong when it comes to parks) and how strict New York is when it comes to alienation of parks.

[RR503]

18 minutes ago, bobtehpanda said:

If you were to even run an el down the LIE (which opens up old wounds that weren't present with AirTrain JFK construction, like how Nassau has always wanted the HOV extended through to the QMT), where would you even put a subway-elevated connection?

I agree: 

37 minutes ago, RR503 said:

LIE only works if its paired with a bypass on the LIRR ROW, as that allows you to just run an el down the LIE median the whole way. 

And yeah, no HOV straight through is sad, but to eschew a new subway for that is quite the questionable planning decision. Regardless, what’s stopping them from killing a general traffic lane for HOV? 

[bobtehpanda]

5 hours ago, RR503 said:

I agree: 

And yeah, no HOV straight through is sad, but to eschew a new subway for that is quite the questionable planning decision. Regardless, what’s stopping them from killing a general traffic lane for HOV? 

Nassau doesn't want that. Nassau wants 3 lanes + HOV. Queens has repeatedly said no, mostly because an HOV would mostly be of benefit to Long Island commuters.

As far as the bypass goes, if you're going to send a branch of it to somewhere that isn't Jamaica PW is probably the better choice, since the Main Line only really has room for six tracks and shoving the post-ESA 8TPH down a four-track Main Line would be a tight fit.

[RR503]

Just now, bobtehpanda said:

Nassau doesn't want that. Nassau wants 3 lanes + HOV. Queens has repeatedly said no, mostly because an HOV would mostly be of benefit to Long Island commuters.

I'm well aware. I'm saying there are other ways to increase highway cap if this is done. 

Just now, bobtehpanda said:

 As far as the bypass goes, if you're going to send a branch of it to somewhere that isn't Jamaica PW is probably the better choice, since the Main Line only really has room for six tracks and shoving the post-ESA 8TPH down a four-track Main Line would be a tight fit.

Why waste subway cap on something that already exists? The current East River tubes are nowhere near capacity (37tph out of a possible 50-60), and MNR, thanks to all the constraints on high-frequency service along the NHL, isn't gonna change that. So we're stuck with a 4-track LIRR main feeding six Manhattan-bound tunnels. Four LIRR tracks feed four tunnels; Amtrak/MNR feed half of the other two. the other half of the sixth tunnel can feed the PW, no sweat. 

Beyond that, if you want to talk about things that residents of Nassau won't want....

[bobtehpanda]

 

19 hours ago, RR503 said:

This pretty much speaks for itself, but take a good look at the Lefrak area, and keep in mind that the low density area just east of Flushing Meadows is QC, which I'd imagine would be quite the ridership draw.

Now, you're right that highway-running transit isn't as friendly to development as routes under normal roads, but I frankly see this as an opportunity to change that. A lot of the LIE in that stretch is sunken in cuts -- given that we're already constructing an AirTrain style el, why not just deck over some sections? Make a park or, more housing. 

Again, I think Jewel is, all else, equal, a better route (maybe lower density than LIE, but walkshed contains more developable land), but the cost, IMO swings this in favor of LIE. 

Slight correction: the giant blank space east of Main St is Queens College. The giant blank space west of it, between the Van Wyck and Main, is a cemetery. On the Jewel side, the cemetery's neighbors are co-op apartments, but on the LIE side it's single family housing.

I wouldn't bet my horses on a deck park. A three block highway deck park in Dallas was $110M.  It would cost quite a lot to deck even one station area, let alone the entire submerged highway. As far as structure over deck, I honestly believe that with all the tax breaks involved that HY and Atlantic Yards were both not positive for taxpayer value. If one of the largest business districts in the US can't fund a deck, what can?

[RR503]

13 minutes ago, bobtehpanda said:

Slight correction: the giant blank space east of Main St is Queens College. The giant blank space west of it, between the Van Wyck and Main, is a cemetery. On the Jewel side, the cemetery's neighbors are co-op apartments, but on the LIE side it's single family housing.

Jewel is incontrovertibly the better route. Question is whether or not it's 2-3 billion better.

14 minutes ago, bobtehpanda said:

 I wouldn't bet my horses on a deck park. A three block highway deck park in Dallas was $110M.  It would cost quite a lot to deck even one station area, let alone the entire submerged highway. As far as structure over deck, I honestly believe that with all the tax breaks involved that HY and Atlantic Yards were both not positive for taxpayer value. If one of the largest business districts in the US can't fund a deck, what can?

Decking is about more than just profit. Highways quite literally rend communities, and contribute to a whole host of noise/atmospheric/light pollution issues. Beyond the issue of development, decking is just good for the areas around them.