Department of Subways - Proposals/Ideas

[Vulturious]

1 minute ago, T to Dyre Avenue said:

I can agree with proposals A and D. Proposal E would be better as a K service running from Bay Ridge to Broadway Junction, which can also run peak direction local service between Broadway Junction and Marcy while the  runs express. Leave the  as is.

What exactly would be the point of doing this?

In fairness, they could repurpose 38th St Yard in Sunset Park to stable  trains with the occasional trip to CI Yard for maintenance. It wouldn’t be all that different from the  whose trains are stabled at Fresh Pond Yard and deadhead via the  to ENY for maintenance. The old Astoria  didn’t have 38th St as a storage yard and its decrepit R27s and pre-GOH and no A/C R32s and R40s had no other option but to rack up even more miles deadheading over the  or  to get to CI. 

Again, as I've said this earlier, I wouldn't mind this at all. However, the  hasn't even acknowledged it for  service at all, they were planning on having the  use it, probably better for the  to take it since the  isn't going to be coming anytime soon. 

[Deucey]

8 hours ago, Bklyn Bound 2 Local said:

It might be able to work like the  north of Grand Central.

Sure, if you think the Sixth Ave express tracks under the PATH was an easy and cost effective project.

[Caelestor]

15 hours ago, MottAvFarRockaway said:

Proposals

• Proposal A : Extend the W to 95 Street, and make the R terminate at Whitehall.
• Proposal B : Eliminate the D by extending the B's northern terminus to include 205th Street and making the B a full-time route.
• Proposal C : Eliminate the M and parts of the M will be served by E and F trains.
• Proposal D : Eliminate the J/Z skip-stop, and replace it with the J peak express.
• Proposal E : Include the K/T but run Chambers Street (K) or Metropolitan Avenue (T) to 95 Street and make it a full-time route, instead of a part-time route.
• Proposal F : Extend the G towards Flushing-Main Street and include an express counterpart, the H.
• Proposal G : Eliminate the Franklin Avenue Shuttle totally.

A) Agreed, but it should be Bay idge - Astoria and Forest Hills - hitehall St.

B) What happens to West End? No reason for the  to not run full-time

C) No way should QBL express service be reduced. 

D) Just run a train every 6 minutes.

E) Riders want more service to Midtown. Long-term, the Jamaica Line should be rerouted up 6 Ave and the current Manhattan Bridge north tracks should be sent up 2 Ave.

F) Riders won't take it. You're better off running the (8) train under 50 St/Northern Blvd, connecting to the at Court Sq.

G) Why? If anything, it should be extended towards the .

[Vulturious]

5 minutes ago, Caelestor said:

A) Agreed, but it should be Bay idge - Astoria and Forest Hills - hitehall St.

B) What happens to West End? No reason for the  to not run full-time

C) No way should QBL express service be reduced. 

D) Just run a train every 6 minutes.

E) Riders want more service to Midtown. Long-term, the Jamaica Line should be rerouted up 6 Ave and the current Manhattan Bridge north tracks should be sent up 2 Ave.

F) Riders won't take it. You're better off running the (8) train under 50 St/Northern Blvd, connecting to the at Court Sq.

G) Why? If anything, it should be extended towards the .

Mans demolished it for no reason whatsoever.

[Armandito]

22 minutes ago, Caelestor said:

F) Riders won't take it. You're better off running the (8) train under 50 St/Northern Blvd, connecting to the at Court Sq.

G) Why? If anything, it should be extended towards the .

Better yet, have the H routed up 21st Street and the GCP to LaGuardia, and combine it with an underground Franklin Avenue branch for a new through Crosstown service between Queens and Brooklyn. Will certainly help make service along most of the Crosstown Line more frequent without having to sacrifice service along the four-tracked segment of the Culver Line to make way for more frequent service.

[Vulturious]

6 minutes ago, Armandito said:

Better yet, have the H routed up 21st Street and the GCP to LaGuardia, and combine it with an underground Franklin Avenue branch for a new through Crosstown service between Queens and Brooklyn. Will certainly help make service along most of the Crosstown Line more frequent without having to sacrifice service along the four-tracked segment of the Culver Line to make way for more frequent service.

So what you're saying is  trains are making express stops instead of the  or are  trains still running express, but making it so  trains aren't impacted enough? I kinda forgot about what you planned on having the  run as.

[Armandito]

9 minutes ago, Vulturious said:

So what you're saying is  trains are making express stops instead of the  or are  trains still running express, but making it so  trains aren't impacted enough? I kinda forgot about what you planned on having the  run as.

and train service will remain unchanged in my plan.

[Theli11]

14 hours ago, Caelestor said:

F) Riders won't take it. You're better off running the (8) train under 50 St/Northern Blvd, connecting to the at Court Sq.

On 9/24/2020 at 3:20 AM, MottAvFarRockaway said:

• Proposal F : Extend the G towards Flushing-Main Street and include an express counterpart, the H.

I'd personally extend the and train to Northern. I don't know what an (8) train would do because I don't know what an (8) train is.
Even if it was just the  , it allows for a connection to  trains at Broadway, and trains are Court Sq. It'll also allow them to access South Brooklyn quicker, via on Franklin Shuttle. You can even make it a transfer point between Queens Plaza and Queensboro Plaza. Then it'll run on Northern Blvd. 

[T to Dyre Avenue]

2 hours ago, Theli11 said:

I'd personally extend the and train to Northern. I don't know what an (8) train would do because I don't know what an (8) train is.
Even if it was just the  , it allows for a connection to  trains at Broadway, and trains are Court Sq. It'll also allow them to access South Brooklyn quicker, via on Franklin Shuttle. You can even make it a transfer point between Queens Plaza and Queensboro Plaza. Then it'll run on Northern Blvd. 

The (8) is a North Queens-Midtown Manhattan service running mostly via Northern Blvd in Queens and 50th St in Manhattan. It was proposed in this thread pretty recently. 

What I like about it is that it would be located in Midtown between the  and  tunnels and have connections to both while still in Queens, so it can function as an effective release valve for both of those perennially overcrowded lines.

I have mixed feelings about sending the  to Flushing via Northern. While that does create a line parallel to the  in North Queens in a corridor that’s completely choked by auto traffic, I feel like all it’s going to do is eventually funnel more people onto the already overcrowded  and  at Court Square. Better to have a new line that continues into the heart of Midtown Manhattan and can potentially bring riders closer to their jobs without having to transfer onto already packed trains - and likely have to transfer again once in Midtown.

[Theli11]

9 minutes ago, T to Dyre Avenue said:

The (8) is a North Queens-Midtown Manhattan service running mostly via Northern Blvd in Queens and 50th St in Manhattan. It was proposed in this thread pretty recently. 

What I like about it is that it would be located in Midtown between the  and  tunnels and have connections to both while still in Queens, so it can function as an effective release valve for both of those perennially overcrowded lines.

I have mixed feelings about sending the  to Flushing via Northern. While that does create a line parallel to the  in North Queens in a corridor that’s completely choked by auto traffic, I feel like all it’s going to do is eventually funnel more people onto the already overcrowded  and  at Court Square. Better to have a new line that continues into the heart of Midtown Manhattan and can potentially bring riders closer to their jobs without having to transfer onto already packed trains - and likely have to transfer again once in Midtown.

Ah okay, I think that a train from 50th to Flushing would work better than the Crosstown. I do think that it should be a B-Division train. This way, a Queens Super Express  *runs on Second Avenue can be made to go to Forest Hills via the same tunnel.*
The 50th-Northern Blvd Crosstown [I'll call it  ] should also end at 72 - Broadway after going up on Amsterdam - 50th. I still think that the  or  train should go to Northern (probably the since it'll have more connections going via Franklin) and the  should go up 21 St - Queensbridge to the . This way you still have that Manhattan Service, and you get faster Brooklyn Service. And get that extension. 

[MottAvFarRockaway]

New World New York project

• Proposal A : Implement the K service and run from 207th Street / Inwood to Jamaica–179 Street, to boost the Queens Boulevard service. Also, revert the E service back to its old express route.
• Proposal B : Make the C a part-time route, run 168th Street to Lefferts Boulevard instead of 168 Street to Euclid Avenue and call it the < C >.
• Proposal C : Eliminate the J/Z skip-stop; reconstruct the Jamaica Line because of its curves and then implement a peak express < J > service.
• Proposal D : Return the N and R to its pre-1987 routes. The W service will be renamed < N >.
• Proposal E : Make the A run 207th Street to Lefferts Boulevard or Rockaway Park. The A to Rockaway Park service becomes full-time and it replaces the Rockaway Park Shuttle.
• Proposal F : Implement a new service, H, running from Euclid Avenue to Mott Avenue – Far Rockaway.
• Proposal G : Return the G back to its pre-2010 route.
• Proposal H : Implement a Woodlawn Express service, the < 4 >, to boost travel times on the 4 route.
• Proposal I : Run a new service departing Metropolitan Avenue along the brown M route and terminate at 95th Street instead of Bay Parkway, call it the < R > and run only part-time as an addition to the regular R service.
• Proposal J : Restore the Concourse peak express service, the < D >, to boost travel times on the D.

Services included in the proposal

<J><R>

Edited September 26, 2020 by MottAvFarRockaway

[Vulturious]

16 minutes ago, MottAvFarRockaway said:

New World New York project

• Proposal A : Implement the K service and run from 207th Street / Inwood to Jamaica–179 Street, to boost the Queens Boulevard service. Also, revert the E service back to its old express route.
• Proposal B : Make the C a part-time route, run 168th Street to Lefferts Boulevard instead of 168 Street to Euclid Avenue and call it the < C >.
• Proposal C : Eliminate the J/Z skip-stop; reconstruct the Jamaica Line because of its curves and then implement a peak express < J > service.
• Proposal D : Return the N and R to its pre-1987 routes. The W service will be renamed < N >.
• Proposal E : Make the A run 207th Street to Lefferts Boulevard or Rockaway Park. The A to Rockaway Park service becomes full-time and it replaces the Rockaway Park Shuttle.
• Proposal F : Implement a new service, H, running from Euclid Avenue to Mott Avenue – Far Rockaway.
• Proposal G : Return the G back to its pre-2010 route.
• Proposal H : Implement a Woodlawn Express service, the < 4 >, to boost travel times on the 4 route.
• Proposal I : Run a new service departing Metropolitan Avenue along the brown M route and terminate at 95th Street instead of Bay Parkway, call it the < R > and run only part-time as an addition to the regular R service.
• Proposal J : Restore the Concourse peak express service, the < D >, to boost travel times on the D.

Services included in the proposal

<J><R>

1. Implementing the  from Inwood to Jamaica isn't a bad idea, however there aren't any switches that can allow that. Not to mention, there would have to be reduced service that has to happen and I can't tell if you are planning on having this train running express or local. If express, then that is unnecessary because then you have to reduce  and  trains per hour, if local, then the same is going to happen with the  and  because no one wants to take the  because it isn't going to Manhattan. There is also going to be the same exact problem QBL had pre-2010
2. There is really no point in changing it to a , better to keep it as  because Diamonds nowadays are shown to be an express variant of the service. The , , and  are already part-time yet they aren't Diamonds. Also, people at Lefferts are going to complain about not having direct express service which I personally feel Lefferts take the  instead of the .
3. This idea, I can 100% get down and agree on. However, people are going to lose service and be complaining, but people already go and decide to ride the  instead so oh well. It also depends if the  really wants to invest in this idea which probably might not happen unfortunately.
4. That would be the case if the  actually made 38th St into a yard storage for the  to use and based out of Coney. 
5. I'm combining Proposal's E and F because there isn't a reason to do this. The  would be causing delays for people in Queens all together because you have the  running local to Lefferts which already is forcing delays for  trains because of yet another merge happening between the  and .
6. As I said before, no one wants to take the  and will be having the same exact problem pre-2010 QBL had.
7. I don't know if there is high enough demand for an express  service because that leaves less service for local people trying to get in and out of Manhattan.
8. Well with the  back at Astoria, there wouldn't really be a need for an extra service. Then again, we don't know if service would actually be better or not.

[Theli11]

15 minutes ago, MottAvFarRockaway said:

New World New York project

• Proposal A : Implement the K service and run from 207th Street / Inwood to Jamaica–179 Street, to boost the Queens Boulevard service. Also, revert the E service back to its old express route.
• Proposal B : Make the C a part-time route, run 168th Street to Lefferts Boulevard instead of 168 Street to Euclid Avenue and call it the < C >.
• Proposal C : Eliminate the J/Z skip-stop; reconstruct the Jamaica Line because of its curves and then implement a peak express < J > service.
• Proposal D : Return the N and R to its pre-1987 routes. The W service will be renamed < N >.
• Proposal E : Make the A run 207th Street to Lefferts Boulevard or Rockaway Park. The A to Rockaway Park service becomes full-time and it replaces the Rockaway Park Shuttle.
• Proposal F : Implement a new service, H, running from Euclid Avenue to Mott Avenue – Far Rockaway.
• Proposal G : Return the G back to its pre-2010 route.
• Proposal H : Implement a Woodlawn Express service, the < 4 >, to boost travel times on the 4 route.
• Proposal I : Run a new service departing Metropolitan Avenue along the brown M route and terminate at 95th Street instead of Bay Parkway, call it the < R > and run only part-time as an addition to the regular R service.
• Proposal J : Restore the Concourse peak express service, the < D >, to boost travel times on the D.

Proposal A: How would this work? There's no crossover between 53 and 8th Av via 59 St. 
Proposal B: Why the part time service? the needs the because it'll make the slag from 59 to the Rockaways.
Proposal C : Yes.
Proposal D : I get this one, so Ill leave it alone
Proposal E: There's not enough service for that.  Leave it how it is. It works... Wait what do you mean NO FAR ROCKAWAY? 
Proposal F: Ah okay, you're slowly wrecking Fulton St, the and train would have to share a track, so you might as well keep it how it is. There's no reason for Proposal E or F. Proposal B is.. fine. minus the part time service (maybe part time to Lefferts blvd?)
Proposal G: Nope, it's gonna run nothing but AIR. 
Proposal H: You'll be missing a bunch of stop with high ridership and simply cutting it in half. You're boosting travel times, but you're making waits longer for more people.
Proposal I: Question: is the also running or will it be just the <R> on Metropolitan. You'll still have 12 TPH (can't fix the Williamsburg bridge), and splitting that between 3 routes and peak direction express service would be a mess.
Proposal J: the  is already a peak direction express, the works fine, especially in peak direction. 

Rockaway is fine with the current service it has, Don't mess with Woodlawn, it was already tested that that service would SUCK for everyone (I've lived in Highbridge trust me. 161, 167, 170th, 174, are all stations with high ridership. Making a train go only two stops (Woodlawn to Burnside to 149 St) trust me, nobody is taking the train and everyone DREADS the express routing. 
 

[Armandito]

41 minutes ago, Theli11 said:

Don't mess with Woodlawn, it was already tested that that service would SUCK for everyone (I've lived in Highbridge trust me. 161, 167, 170th, 174, are all stations with high ridership. Making a train go only two stops (Woodlawn to Burnside to 149 St) trust me, nobody is taking the train and everyone DREADS the express routing. 

It's true. The line has too many high ridership stations to justify an express service. Local stops along Jerome became more crowded along with the locals serving them when the  express used to run, not to mention longer waiting times heading toward Manhattan. Expresses, on the other hand, were flying past those stations half empty. It was a recipe for disaster which led to its demise after just a few months.

Edited September 26, 2020 by Armandito

[Theli11]

3 hours ago, MottAvFarRockaway said:

• Proposal A : Implement the K service and run from 207th Street / Inwood to Jamaica–179 Street, to boost the Queens Boulevard service. Also, revert the E service back to its old express route.

3 hours ago, MottAvFarRockaway said:

• Proposal B : Make the C a part-time route, run 168th Street to Lefferts Boulevard instead of 168 Street to Euclid Avenue and call it the < C >.

3 hours ago, MottAvFarRockaway said:

• Proposal E : Make the A run 207th Street to Lefferts Boulevard or Rockaway Park. The A to Rockaway Park service becomes full-time and it replaces the Rockaway Park Shuttle.

3 hours ago, MottAvFarRockaway said:

• Proposal F : Implement a new service, H, running from Euclid Avenue to Mott Avenue – Far Rockaway.

There's so much going on in this proposal, and I don't think we've talked about the logical-idiocy of it:
Not only is there a running on a magical switch to the QBL, the is also running from.. Jamaica to Lefferts, which is an extremely long route, especially since it runs to.. both Rockaways. I don't know which one this entails. BUT! I'm assuming the or is running local when the isn't there. the running to Euclid also makes Fulton St line MUCH MUCH more complicated. 
 Fulton St, has at least 3 lines on it at all times from Rockaway Blvd and trains. Then Euclid where  and trains have to terminate (at the same time because.. and trains also have to do the same job for some reason.. 
Whatever your plan is here it's unclear. You're doing A LOT with Fulton and you don't realize it. Either it's all a separate plan or not. If you make a proposal, I will ask you to PLEASE. think about it. Look at previous proposals of the same nature, and see how they were reacted. You're running 3 trains in one track, and they ALL have seperate destinations. There will barely be any service at all on the QBL express from trains, and no service serving Jamaica Terminal. By the way, you're having FIVE trains run CPW, and I don't know if I want to be local to help riders with the utter LACK of trains. OR because it wouldn't be smart to make it change tracks at 145 or 168. But since it seems like we're throwing logic outside of the window I can't help you there. 

Other than that though! Good Point.

 

 

[T to Dyre Avenue]

On 9/25/2020 at 1:03 PM, Theli11 said:

Ah okay, I think that a train from 50th to Flushing would work better than the Crosstown. I do think that it should be a B-Division train. This way, a Queens Super Express  *runs on Second Avenue can be made to go to Forest Hills via the same tunnel.*
The 50th-Northern Blvd Crosstown [I'll call it  ] should also end at 72 - Broadway after going up on Amsterdam - 50th. I still think that the  or  train should go to Northern (probably the since it'll have more connections going via Franklin) and the  should go up 21 St - Queensbridge to the . This way you still have that Manhattan Service, and you get faster Brooklyn Service. And get that extension. 

I recall seeing the 50th St crosstown designated by letter or number, depending on who posted. I’d prefer it to be a B-Division train as well (I’ll call it K to keep it consistent with your post) to take advantage of the additional capacity that a 10-car train of 60-footers provides versus that of a 10-car train of 51-footers, assuming a self-contained line with CBTC and ATO. Though if the K shares its tunnel with a V-Queens Super Express/SAS train, then it would have to run less frequently in order to accommodate the V service. Then the V splits off and the H merges in on Northern Blvd. This would force the 50th St segment to run well below capacity, which is also a problem with the ’s current plans for SAS Phases 3 and 4.

15 hours ago, Theli11 said:

There's so much going on in this proposal, and I don't think we've talked about the logical-idiocy of it:
Not only is there a running on a magical switch to the QBL, the is also running from.. Jamaica to Lefferts, which is an extremely long route, especially since it runs to.. both Rockaways. I don't know which one this entails. BUT! I'm assuming the or is running local when the isn't there. the running to Euclid also makes Fulton St line MUCH MUCH more complicated. 
 Fulton St, has at least 3 lines on it at all times from Rockaway Blvd and trains. Then Euclid where  and trains have to terminate (at the same time because.. and trains also have to do the same job for some reason.. 
Whatever your plan is here it's unclear. You're doing A LOT with Fulton and you don't realize it. Either it's all a separate plan or not. If you make a proposal, I will ask you to PLEASE. think about it. Look at previous proposals of the same nature, and see how they were reacted. You're running 3 trains in one track, and they ALL have seperate destinations. There will barely be any service at all on the QBL express from trains, and no service serving Jamaica Terminal. By the way, you're having FIVE trains run CPW, and I don't know if I want to be local to help riders with the utter LACK of trains. OR because it wouldn't be smart to make it change tracks at 145 or 168. But since it seems like we're throwing logic outside of the window I can't help you there. 

Other than that though! Good Point.

 

 

Agreed. These proposals in particular really just aren’t practical and create more problems than they solve. 

Edited September 26, 2020 by T to Dyre Avenue

[Armandito]

53 minutes ago, T to Dyre Avenue said:

I recall seeing the 50th St crosstown designated by letter or number, depending on who posted.

It was me who posted a Northern Boulevard crosstown route under the designation via Google Maps last month, but deleted it afterwards. While I do agree that this corridor is great for a new subway line to alleviate pressure on the , 50th Street doesn't sit well with me because of the corridor's status as a mostly local-only street, a drawback which could inconvenience some riders transferring to north-south services in Manhattan. Rockefeller Center on Sixth Avenue is pretty much the only express station serving 50th Street.

Edited September 26, 2020 by Armandito

[bobtehpanda]

My idea for an outer borough connector(s)

[Theli11]

3 hours ago, T to Dyre Avenue said:

I recall seeing the 50th St crosstown designated by letter or number, depending on who posted. I’d prefer it to be a B-Division train as well (I’ll call it K to keep it consistent with your post) to take advantage of the additional capacity that a 10-car train of 60-footers provides versus that of a 10-car train of 51-footers, assuming a self-contained line with CBTC and ATO. Though if the K shares its tunnel with a V-Queens Super Express/SAS train, then it would have to run less frequently in order to accommodate the V service. Then the V splits off and the H merges in on Northern Blvd. This would force the 50th St segment to run well below capacity, which is also a problem with the ’s current plans for SAS Phases 3 and 4.

My idea was that the  would be on the local track and the  on the express. They wouldn’t have to be on the same track. 
Probably should move the  to 57th St after 55-2nd Av. 

[Theli11]

1 hour ago, bobtehpanda said:

My idea for an outer borough connector(s)

I think it’s a cool idea, but I’m not sure about that bridge, would a tunnel be a better idea? Plus a stop at Rikers Island seems potentially dangerous. But it does hit important places. I think Woodhaven would be a better road for the train. This way you don’t have to use Jackson Heights and do a better transfer at another station for  and  trains (separately). It just needs an alternative from Jackson. I do like the idea of two connectors. (Could use an express/second local for 86 to Fordham Plaza)

[Armandito]

1 hour ago, Theli11 said:

I think it’s a cool idea, but I’m not sure about that bridge, would a tunnel be a better idea? Plus a stop at Rikers Island seems potentially dangerous. But it does hit important places. I think Woodhaven would be a better road for the train. This way you don’t have to use Jackson Heights and do a better transfer at another station for  and  trains (separately). It just needs an alternative from Jackson. I do like the idea of two connectors. (Could use an express/second local for 86 to Fordham Plaza)

Definitely not a good idea to build a station on Rikers Island. That's a jail complex and the DOC is very touchy about outsiders traveling there. Security is tight and a subway station there would surely be opposed by the department, given its propensity to worsen already dangerous conditions at the facilities.

[bobtehpanda]

5 hours ago, Theli11 said:

I think it’s a cool idea, but I’m not sure about that bridge, would a tunnel be a better idea? Plus a stop at Rikers Island seems potentially dangerous. But it does hit important places. I think Woodhaven would be a better road for the train. This way you don’t have to use Jackson Heights and do a better transfer at another station for  and  trains (separately). It just needs an alternative from Jackson. I do like the idea of two connectors. (Could use an express/second local for 86 to Fordham Plaza)

All of these are tunnels. The East River isn't very deep.

Jackson Heights is better because it has so many transfers. Anyone using a circumferential is most likely changing trains at both ends, so you want to make the transfers as convenient as possible. Having direct connections to the  is better than having direct connections to the since the and serve unique destinations from their local. Otherwise everyone coming from Jamaica who wants to go to, say, Nostrand and Church, is now making a four-seat ride on the new crosstowns or they're transferring in the city with one transfer; direct connections would reduce that to three and make it more palatable.

4 hours ago, Armandito said:

Definitely not a good idea to build a station on Rikers Island. That's a jail complex and the DOC is very touchy about outsiders traveling there. Security is tight and a subway station there would surely be opposed by the department, given its propensity to worsen already dangerous conditions at the facilities.

Rikers is closing, isn't it?

Presumably whatever replaces it (probably affordable housing or jobs) is going to need transit.

[Armandito]

6 minutes ago, bobtehpanda said:

All of these are tunnels. The East River isn't very deep.

Jackson Heights is better because it has so many transfers. Anyone using a circumferential is most likely changing trains at both ends, so you want to make the transfers as convenient as possible. Having direct connections to the  is better than having direct connections to the since the and serve unique destinations from their local. Otherwise everyone coming from Jamaica who wants to go to, say, Nostrand and Church, is now making a four-seat ride on the new crosstowns or they're transferring in the city with one transfer; direct connections would reduce that to three and make it more palatable.

Rikers is closing, isn't it?

Presumably whatever replaces it (probably affordable housing or jobs) is going to need transit.

If Rikers does close, it's very likely the PANYNJ will buy the island from the city to expand LaGuardia Airport.

[Vulturious]

32 minutes ago, Armandito said:

If Rikers does close, it's very likely the PANYNJ will buy the island from the city to expand LaGuardia Airport.

Oh that's actually a really good idea and would be better for LaGuardia. This would be a much better investment than Cuomo's LGA Airtrain from Flushing.

[bobtehpanda]

1 minute ago, Armandito said:

If Rikers does close, it's very likely the PANYNJ will buy the island from the city to expand LaGuardia Airport.

Honestly, I find that doubtful.

New landfill to the extent needed is not happening in 2020. There is no way that could possibly clear an EIS in this day and age. If that doesn't do it, the political anger of millions of people who would be affected by noise from a new runway would stop it. And the main problems at LaGuardia are not a lack of runways, but the overcrowded airspace shared between Newark, Teterboro, LaGuardia, and JFK.

And other than a new runway the island is in the exact wrong place for an LGA expansion; extremely far from any roads or connecting infrastructure, so even if it was used for that purpose a subway would be helpful.