subwaykid256 Posted July 17, 2019 Share #7951 Posted July 17, 2019 5 hours ago, subwaykid256 said: Question is there any viability to expand the past Lefferts Blvd via Liberty Av? Perhaps to Sutphin Blvd? Also thoughts on my line Sorry just making some edits Dyker Heights -Crospey Av/ 14 Av 86 St/14 Av Bay Ridge Pkwy/14 Av Bay Ridge Av/14 Av New Utrecht Av - 62 St 54 St/14 Av 46 St/14 Av 39 St/14 Av Church Av - McDonald Av Coney Island Av/ Church Avs Flatbush - Ocean Avs/Church Av Linden Blvd - Caton Av/ Bedford Av Empire Blvd/Bedford Av Eastern Pkwy/Bedford Av transfer at Franklin Av for Fulton St - Atlantic Av/Bedford Av transfer at Nostrand Av for connection to L.I.R.R Gates Av/Bedford Av Lafayette Av/Bedford Av Myrtle Av/Bedford Av Flushing Av/Bedford Av Rodney- Keap Sts/ Bedford Av turns left to S 10 St Williamsburg - S 10 St/ Wythe Av BQX (tunnel on Grand St Manhattan) Grand St/East Broadway East Broadway- Rutgers St Chatham Sq/East Broadway X ( Red Hook- LaGuardia Airport via Hanover sq & 63 St tunnel) Grand St / Chrystie St x (Possible transfer to via Bowery) 2 Av - Houston St x (Teal from Broadway Junction - 242 St ) 14 St/ 2 Av X 23 & 34 Sts are local stops served by the X & 42 St/2 Av X 55 St/2 Av 72 St/ 2Av 86 St/ 2 Av 96 St/2 Av 106 & 116 Sts are local stations served by 125th St/2 Av 3 Av - 138 St 3 Av - 149 St 163 St & Claremont Pkwy are local stops served by Bronx - Tremont Ave 183 St- Lesandro Junior Way/3 Av goes via Lorillard Pl turns right on Fordham Rd Arthur Av - Fordham University/ Fordham Rd Pelham Pkwy - White Plains Rd Pelham Pkwy - Esplande Seymour Av/ Pelham Pkwy (turns left to Seymour Av) Allerton Av/Eastchester Rd Gun Hill Rd/ Eastchester Rd Boston Rd/Eastchester Rd 222 St/Eastchester Rd 233 St/Laconia Av turns right on 233 st then left on Baychester Av Nereid-Pitman Avs/Baychester Av Wakefield 241 St 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SubwayFan3000 Posted July 28, 2019 Share #7952 Posted July 28, 2019 My B Division Proposal is this, i don't know why many of you are against this proposal but it would benefits commuters from Deserted Areas like Eastern Queens, Flatbush, Staten Island and etc. *Same as Today Brighton Beach to Co-Op City 168th St to Cambria Heights-234th St Coney Island to Co-Op City WTC to Queens Village - Springfield Blvd Coney Island to Floral Park - Little Neck Pkwy Oakland Gardens-Cloverdale Blvd to Fort Hamilton - 92nd St Hanover Sq to Whitestone-14th Avenue Broad St to Rosedale-Hook Creek Blvd WTC to Rockaway Park-Beach 116th St Canarsie-Rockaway Pkwy to Upper West Side-72nd St Maspeth - Queens Blvd to Floral Park - 263rd st *Same as Today or Coney Island to Little Neck - Little Neck Pkwy Coney Island to Co-Op City Bay Ridge-95th St to Floral Park - 263rd St or (Staten Island) South Beach-Newberry Ave to Floral Park-263rd St Broadway-125th St to Cambria Heights-234th St Hanover Sq to Throgs Neck-Schurz Ave Astoria-Ditmars to Chelsea-Travis Ave (Staten Island) or College Point-14th Ave to Chelsea-Travis Ave (Staten Island) Full Service, Chambers St to Rosedale-Hook Creek Blvd 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maxwell179 Posted July 29, 2019 Share #7953 Posted July 29, 2019 On 7/28/2019 at 10:58 AM, subwayfan1998 said: My B Division Proposal is this, i don't know why many of you are against this proposal but it would benefits commuters from Deserted Areas like Eastern Queens, Flatbush, Staten Island and etc. it’s because you be overdoing it 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Caelestor Posted July 30, 2019 Share #7954 Posted July 30, 2019 These ideas are great and all, but here's a proposal that's probably really pressing - stop running trains every 12 minutes because no one is willing to wait around that long. The solution is a bit harder to pinpoint but probably involves overhauling the existing work and flagging rules. 5 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SubwayFan3000 Posted July 30, 2019 Share #7955 Posted July 30, 2019 19 hours ago, Maxwell179 said: it’s because you be overdoing it Same goes for R68OnBroadway 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
R68OnBroadway Posted July 30, 2019 Share #7956 Posted July 30, 2019 33 minutes ago, subwayfan1998 said: Same goes for R68OnBroadway ? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SubwayFan3000 Posted July 30, 2019 Share #7957 Posted July 30, 2019 20 minutes ago, R68OnBroadway said: ? you also be overdoing it as well just like be, by extending from Astoria to Euclid Avenue. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
R68OnBroadway Posted July 30, 2019 Share #7958 Posted July 30, 2019 27 minutes ago, subwayfan1998 said: you also be overdoing it as well just like be, by extending from Astoria to Euclid Avenue. I don’t know about you, but I think a Montague-Hoyt tunnel would be much better in terms of cost-benefit than a slow ass to the county line or a unnecessarily long to Floral Park... 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SubwayFan3000 Posted July 30, 2019 Share #7959 Posted July 30, 2019 1 minute ago, R68OnBroadway said: I don’t know about you, but I think a Montague-Hoyt tunnel would be much better in terms of cost-benefit than a slow ass to the county line or a unnecessarily long to Floral Park... so you are against extending or to Floral Park? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
R68OnBroadway Posted July 30, 2019 Share #7960 Posted July 30, 2019 43 minutes ago, subwayfan1998 said: so you are against extending or to Floral Park? Yes 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SubwayFan3000 Posted July 30, 2019 Share #7961 Posted July 30, 2019 19 minutes ago, R68OnBroadway said: Yes Why? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
R68OnBroadway Posted July 30, 2019 Share #7962 Posted July 30, 2019 2 minutes ago, subwayfan1998 said: Why? It's overkill. The and already have reliability issues and the last thing we need is for them to be longer... you also have to consider that residents out there don't want a subway and that we really only need extensions in areas to decongest bus lines like the to FLB, to Springfield (with it maybe running express after 71st to counter the effect of a longer route), and to LGA and then Flushing to siphon some riders. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SubwayFan3000 Posted July 30, 2019 Share #7963 Posted July 30, 2019 21 minutes ago, R68OnBroadway said: It's overkill. The and already have reliability issues and the last thing we need is for them to be longer... you also have to consider that residents out there don't want a subway and that we really only need extensions in areas to decongest bus lines like the to FLB, to Springfield (with it maybe running express after 71st to counter the effect of a longer route), and to LGA and then Flushing to siphon some riders. I Have Friends from these Neighborhoods they said "it would be great to use Subways than Slow Ass Buses" 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
R68OnBroadway Posted July 30, 2019 Share #7964 Posted July 30, 2019 8 minutes ago, subwayfan1998 said: I Have Friends from these Neighborhoods they said "it would be great to use Subways than Slow Ass Buses" That's probably a small group of fanners. I doubt the average people of Glen Oaks and Floral Park want a subway and would be fine with a 10-20 min bus ride to the subway. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SubwayFan3000 Posted July 30, 2019 Share #7965 Posted July 30, 2019 50 minutes ago, R68OnBroadway said: That's probably a small group of fanners. I doubt the average people of Glen Oaks and Floral Park want a subway and would be fine with a 10-20 min bus ride to the subway. ok, u know more better and i'm new to this forum. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SubwayFan3000 Posted July 30, 2019 Share #7966 Posted July 30, 2019 wether you are against or not, More than a third of all New Yorkers don’t live within walking distance of a subway or train station especially those in Low-Income and Middle Income Neighborhoods. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maxwell179 Posted July 30, 2019 Share #7967 Posted July 30, 2019 3 hours ago, subwayfan1998 said: you also be overdoing it as well just like be, by extending from Astoria to Euclid Avenue. that’s not a bad idea and that’s still within the current subway limits , you be tryna have trains go from the middle of Long Island to Washington Heights 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SubwayFan3000 Posted July 30, 2019 Share #7968 Posted July 30, 2019 (edited) 19 minutes ago, Maxwell179 said: that’s not a bad idea and that’s still within the current subway limits , you be tryna have trains go from the middle of Long Island to Washington Heights Middle of Long Island is Mineola, Nassau and Suffolk. I'm saying Extending Trains from 168th Street to Cambria Heights is not a bad Idea nor does extending trains from Bay Ridge and Coney Island to Floral Park is a bad idea either, it improves travel options for residents from transit deserts in Queens like Queens Village, Pomonok, Fresh Meadows, Floral Park, Bayside and Cambria Heights, open up new economic opportunities, reduce traffic congestion, providing more space for repurposing of roadways for pedestrians, bikers, and goods transporters. Large parts of Queens are not on the subway system, although many of these neighborhoods have Long Island Rail Road stations. Ridership is very low at these stops because service is infrequent and expensive. These improvements would substantially improve access to major open spaces, such as Alley Pond Park, Cunningham Park and Floyd Bennett Field. Edited July 30, 2019 by subwayfan1998 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
T to Dyre Avenue Posted July 30, 2019 Share #7969 Posted July 30, 2019 (edited) 2 hours ago, R68OnBroadway said: It's overkill. The and already have reliability issues and the last thing we need is for them to be longer... you also have to consider that residents out there don't want a subway and that we really only need extensions in areas to decongest bus lines like the to FLB, to Springfield (with it maybe running express after 71st to counter the effect of a longer route), and to LGA and then Flushing to siphon some riders. I’d be glad to see any one of these extensions get built, but especially a extension to FLB (since that would be closest to me) though I think the heavy traffic on Northern Blvd between FLB and Bell Blvd definitely warrants subway service at least up to Bell. Though I’d be just as glad to see central Flushing get a second line in the (or the if Broadway is de-interlined as it should be) to siphon riders off the . Edited July 31, 2019 by T to Dyre Avenue 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bwwnyc123 Posted July 31, 2019 Share #7970 Posted July 31, 2019 I could see extended to Springfield Blvd or further it would reduce bus riders. Most riders especially during rush hours going to and from work or school from Eastern Queens take buses to Subways and some do not use LIRR. If those subway lines were extended further East it would reduce the need for buses. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SubwayFan3000 Posted July 31, 2019 Share #7971 Posted July 31, 2019 20 minutes ago, bwwnyc123 said: I could see extended to Springfield Blvd or further it would reduce bus riders. Most riders especially during rush hours going to and from work or school from Eastern Queens take buses to Subways and some do not use LIRR. If those subway lines were extended further East it would reduce the need for buses. It would make Buses less overcrowded than it is now. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LGA Link N Train Posted July 31, 2019 Share #7972 Posted July 31, 2019 19 hours ago, subwayfan1998 said: you also be overdoing it as well just like be, by extending from Astoria to Euclid Avenue. This is not overkill. An from Astoria to Euclid only Requires a new tunnel between Whitehall and Court Street (NYTM). Doing this will increase capacity on the Fulton Street line by 50% and allow trains to run Express to Lefferts Blvd or the Rockaway's. While it’d be nice to have subways in outer Queens, I wouldn’t extend everything cause it’s overkill and some of these proposals are not feasible. Psersonally, I prefer these ideas: To Francis Lewis via Northern or a Branch to College Point. A new bus terminal will be built somewhere close to Francis Lewis (Which I’ll go more in depth later). to Springfield (Express between Forest Hills and 179. In order for this to work, either trains would need to be extended to 179, the Queens Bypass would need to be built, or Queens Blvd needs to be (mostly) De-Interlined. Maybe this can work with the arrangement with one of the locals going to 179. And just like the extension. A bus terminal would need to be built around Hillside and SpringField/Braddock since the current set up for the Street won’t allow for it. Doing this would allow for a variety of Route Changes to Buses along Hillside and Adjacent Streets. LaGuardia Link Train (Or when Broadway is De-Interlined. Nuff said. to Laurelton because there is Space for a New Yard along the LIRR Atlantic/Rockaway Branch. Or to Cambria Heights via Merrick Blvd and Linden Blvd. I prefer the First Option TBH. One Stop Extension to Merrick/168. If possible, you could extend THAT to Cambria Heights instead of the . It could Stop Short of Merrick, then Turn Down 168, then Head via Merrick and Linden Blvd’s. With only Extending the Current Subways in Queens, you can achieve the following benefits: • Making a Better Bus Network for Queens • Promote Transit-Oriented Development (TOD) • Better Subway Access throughout Queens. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JeremiahC99 Posted July 31, 2019 Share #7973 Posted July 31, 2019 49 minutes ago, LaGuardia Link N Tra said: This is not overkill. An from Astoria to Euclid only Requires a new tunnel between Whitehall and Court Street (NYTM). Doing this will increase capacity on the Fulton Street line by 50% and allow trains to run Express to Lefferts Blvd or the Rockaway's. That is exactly what’s I was thinking as well when doing my service changes related to building a new Nassau-8th Avenue Line connection along with the Whitehall connection to the Fulton IND. In my plans, I have the having a train frequency of 15 trains per hour. That’s essentially one train every 4 minutes. With the line going to Astoria and on Fulton Local, this alone means more frequent service on Fulton Local. I also have the operating express on the Fulton Street line to one of the terminals (hopefully NOT Far Rockaway) at 6 trains per hour, supplementing the train’s 15 trains per hour. Note that the 15 trains is split between the two remaining terminals. With the going to Astoria, the going to 96th Street at 10 trains per hour with the and having a combined throughout of 25 trains per hour, we should see not only more reliable service for riders, but both Fulton Local and Express riders would see more frequent service. Big boon for all of Central Brooklyn. Granted I’ll have to replace Queens Blvd service with other routes, but that’s another story. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wallyhorse Posted July 31, 2019 Share #7974 Posted July 31, 2019 1 hour ago, JeremiahC99 said: That is exactly what’s I was thinking as well when doing my service changes related to building a new Nassau-8th Avenue Line connection along with the Whitehall connection to the Fulton IND. In my plans, I have the having a train frequency of 15 trains per hour. That’s essentially one train every 4 minutes. With the line going to Astoria and on Fulton Local, this alone means more frequent service on Fulton Local. I also have the operating express on the Fulton Street line to one of the terminals (hopefully NOT Far Rockaway) at 6 trains per hour, supplementing the train’s 15 trains per hour. Note that the 15 trains is split between the two remaining terminals. With the going to Astoria, the going to 96th Street at 10 trains per hour with the and having a combined throughout of 25 trains per hour, we should see not only more reliable service for riders, but both Fulton Local and Express riders would see more frequent service. Big boon for all of Central Brooklyn. Granted I’ll have to replace Queens Blvd service with other routes, but that’s another story. Maybe make your planned a train running Euclid to Astoria and leave the as it is now? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lex Posted July 31, 2019 Share #7975 Posted July 31, 2019 I can't see any Broadway service on Fulton Street performing anywhere near better than on Queens Boulevard (at least, not where it counts). The best we can do for Fulton Street Local is to directly connect to 8th Avenue Local and tie the resulting service to Lefferts Boulevard (the would displace those trains currently serving it to Rockaway Park). The Astoria Line needs to be extended to LGA, and a maintenance facility needs to be established on that end. South of 95th Street, tail tracks or a storage yard would be constructed so it would be easier to make service for the day. In addition, there would be a small change in Sea Beach service (during the day, service would still favor the , but there would be no less than 5 trips per hour in order to provide extra service and address night service). The main problem with that happens to be the with Phase 3, but the implication seems to be that we'll cross that bridge once we get to it... 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.