Jump to content
Attention: In order to reply to messages, create topics, have access to other features of the community you must sign up for an account.

Department of Subways - Proposals/Ideas


Recommended Posts

So I just had some crazy ass idea that I don't think I've ever seen before; a Worth St connection.

  • (E) trains are connected through to WTC Cortlandt (R) and one of the two stations in the WTC complex closes. (E) trains on weekdays run to 9 Av Lower on the (D) , with some peak hour trains starting at Bay Pkwy. 
    • As far as I know, 9 Av Lower isn't in too terrible shape, since it has to be in good structural condition for the upper level to not collapse onto the lower level
  • (R) trains jog over to the Nassau St Line on Worth St, with platform extensions to Chambers, Fulton & Broad. Trains use the Nassau St Montague connection instead. Jamaica Line trains terminate at Chambers St.
  • (W) trains terminate at City Hall. (City Hall station is closed on weekends.) A transfer is built between Park Place and City Hall. (They're literally around the corner from each other.)

Several benefits:

  • (E) service to Brooklyn
  • Ideally, the Worth St curves are less tight than the City Hall curves
  • (W) service terminating no longer gets in the way of (R) service 
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 11.3k
  • Created
  • Last Reply
21 hours ago, T to Dyre Avenue said:

Yes, I do see that. I guess the area where the trolley cars used to loop back to Brooklyn would be rebuilt to handle (J) and (M) trains, while the Z line stops at the existing platforms. Then leave in a provision to go east under the river. Though the 6th Avenue connecting tracks would have to be rebuilt. 

Isn't that a park or something these days? Destroying a park is a nonstarter.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, bobtehpanda said:

Kinda surprised you also don't throw in Bowery/Grand St as one complex.

I plan to add a Bowery/Grand Complex in my proposal. However, I haven't finalized a vision for how that would look yet, hence why I didn't add it to the list of proposals.

4 hours ago, bobtehpanda said:

So I just had some crazy ass idea that I don't think I've ever seen before; a Worth St connection.

  • (E) trains are connected through to WTC Cortlandt (R) and one of the two stations in the WTC complex closes. (E) trains on weekdays run to 9 Av Lower on the (D) , with some peak hour trains starting at Bay Pkwy. 
    • As far as I know, 9 Av Lower isn't in too terrible shape, since it has to be in good structural condition for the upper level to not collapse onto the lower level
  • (R) trains jog over to the Nassau St Line on Worth St, with platform extensions to Chambers, Fulton & Broad. Trains use the Nassau St Montague connection instead. Jamaica Line trains terminate at Chambers St.
  • (W) trains terminate at City Hall. (City Hall station is closed on weekends.) A transfer is built between Park Place and City Hall. (They're literally around the corner from each other.)

Several benefits:

  • (E) service to Brooklyn
  • Ideally, the Worth St curves are less tight than the City Hall curves
  • (W) service terminating no longer gets in the way of (R) service 

This definitely a crazy idea and one with nice benefits, but looking at it from a Sattelite View (and on OpenRailwayMap) I can't see how swinging the Broadway Line down to Nassau via Worth Street would work.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 hours ago, bobtehpanda said:

Isn't that a park or something these days? Destroying a park is a nonstarter.

Not yet, apparently. I was there last there in early 2020. It still looked like an abandoned trolley car terminal to me. Supposedly, they started construction on the Lowline park in 2019, but postponed it due to lack of money. 
 

https://www.ny1.com/nyc/all-boroughs/news/2020/02/22/low-on-cash--the-lowline-park-is-on-hold

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 hours ago, LaGuardia Link N Tra said:

I plan to add a Bowery/Grand Complex in my proposal. However, I haven't finalized a vision for how that would look yet, hence why I didn't add it to the list of proposals.

This definitely a crazy idea and one with nice benefits, but looking at it from a Sattelite View (and on OpenRailwayMap) I can't see how swinging the Broadway Line down to Nassau via Worth Street would work.

I mean there was supposed to be a whole Worth St subway at one point.

There are other options. The E-W tunnels could be one direction on different blocks. You could make the connection through City Hall Park (although you'd miss Chambers St then)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 7/1/2021 at 2:24 PM, LaGuardia Link N Tra said:

Something that I have left in the other Threads but will also leave here:

My proposals to Upgrade the Jamaica Line in addition to Expanding East New York Yard: 

https://www.google.com/maps/d/u/0/edit?mid=1len8Pe9UFEkHuFGIbxvp6YA9qGILXHx_&ll=40.6852845575412%2C-73.87820389992514&z=17

 

https://www.google.com/maps/d/u/0/edit?mid=1x1IKEVRzPmekdO40Xo65fGO22r3L5T-E&ll=40.67771623832114%2C-73.90033038125411&z=17

Basic Rundown of the proposal:

  • Canal Street and Bowery Platforms get combined so that there isn't any redundant Space and to make Installing ADA-Accessibility Easier in both Stations
  • Essex Street Station Gets an Expansion so that Installing ADA is easier
  • Marcy and the Williamsburg Bus Terminal are consolidated into 1 Facility
  • Hewes-Loimer Combined into Union Avenue for a transfer with the (G)
  • Myrtle gets its platforms extended and the Upper Level is rebuilt/resotred for Queens bound (M) Service.
  • Atlantic Station gets Expanded along with ENY Yard (the latter represented in a different map in addition to including alternatives from the Broadway Junction Transportation Study)
  • Alabama Curve gets widened; Alabama and Van Siclen are Consolidated
  • Crescent Street Curves widened; Crescent and Norwood get consolidated into Chestnut Street and 75th and Cypress Hills get consolidated into Eldert Lane
  • 3rd Track East of Broadway Junction and Woodhaven gets an upper Level similar to the old 125th Street Station from the former 3rd Avenue EL.

I'm not sure it would be feasible to have the (M) run to the abandoned upper level of Myrtle and then join the line.  I did previously propose to rebuild that station, BUT with the idea of that becoming the Myrtle-Brighton line that would absorb the current Franklin Avenue Shuttle (with all station platforms on that section rebuilt to two tracks and 600 foot stations), operating as a "black (V)" train between Metropolitan Avenue (also along with all former Myrtle Avenue EL stations still in use lengthened to 600 feet) to Coney Island with the (Q) 24/7 (or during peak hours, some (Q) trains terminating at Sheepshead Bay if necessary) while the (B) continues to run as it does now.  Stations between Myrtle-Broadway and Franklin Avenue would be:

Tompkins Avenue (same spot as the old Myrtle EL station)

Beford-Nostrand-Lafayette (transfer to (G))

Franklin Avenue (absorbing the current (S) station there and the current Franklin Avenue shuttle line, transfer to (C))

From that point, the line would operate on a rebuilt two-track Franklin Avenue line to Prospect Park and from there as a local to Coney Island via Brighton).

As part of this, I would also have a connection to the Broadway-Brooklyn line from the south that could be used for G.O.'s and emergency re-routes that would allow the (Q) for example if need be to access the Broadway-Brooklyn line and run via the (M) and then (F) to 63rd before resuming its regular route to 96th while the (B) could also use it in an emergency to run the same way to Broadway-Lafayette before resuming regular service.   This also with the additional connection would allow for a line to use Brighton, Franklin and the new connection to reach the Broadway-Brooklyn line and use that via 6th Avenue as well.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, Wallyhorse said:

I'm not sure it would be feasible to have the (M) run to the abandoned upper level of Myrtle and then join the line.  I did previously propose to rebuild that station, BUT with the idea of that becoming the Myrtle-Brighton line that would absorb the current Franklin Avenue Shuttle (with all station platforms on that section rebuilt to two tracks and 600 foot stations), operating as a "black (V)" train between Metropolitan Avenue (also along with all former Myrtle Avenue EL stations still in use lengthened to 600 feet) to Coney Island with the (Q) 24/7 (or during peak hours, some (Q) trains terminating at Sheepshead Bay if necessary) while the (B) continues to run as it does now.  Stations between Myrtle-Broadway and Franklin Avenue would be:

Tompkins Avenue (same spot as the old Myrtle EL station)

Beford-Nostrand-Lafayette (transfer to (G))

Franklin Avenue (absorbing the current (S) station there and the current Franklin Avenue shuttle line, transfer to (C))

From that point, the line would operate on a rebuilt two-track Franklin Avenue line to Prospect Park and from there as a local to Coney Island via Brighton).

As part of this, I would also have a connection to the Broadway-Brooklyn line from the south that could be used for G.O.'s and emergency re-routes that would allow the (Q) for example if need be to access the Broadway-Brooklyn line and run via the (M) and then (F) to 63rd before resuming its regular route to 96th while the (B) could also use it in an emergency to run the same way to Broadway-Lafayette before resuming regular service.   This also with the additional connection would allow for a line to use Brighton, Franklin and the new connection to reach the Broadway-Brooklyn line and use that via 6th Avenue as well.  

You're not the first one to suggest this idea, however, a lot of people actually want this to happen because of its direct crosstown route from southern Queens to southern Brooklyn, the only issue is that Brighton riders along local stations won't have direct access to and from Manhattan which forces them to transfer at an express station just like the IND South Brooklyn line was intended to be. Your proposal also faces the problem of terminal capacity at the Brighton Beach station which can only handle one train service. So it's either the B or Q via Brighton express, it can't be both unfortunately.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, ActiveCity said:

You're not the first one to suggest this idea, however, a lot of people actually want this to happen because of its direct crosstown route from southern Queens to southern Brooklyn, the only issue is that Brighton riders along local stations won't have direct access to and from Manhattan which forces them to transfer at an express station just like the IND South Brooklyn line was intended to be. Your proposal also faces the problem of terminal capacity at the Brighton Beach station which can only handle one train service. So it's either the B or Q via Brighton express, it can't be both unfortunately.

(Q) would remain local in this version. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, ActiveCity said:

You're not the first one to suggest this idea, however, a lot of people actually want this to happen because of its direct crosstown route from southern Queens to southern Brooklyn, the only issue is that Brighton riders along local stations won't have direct access to and from Manhattan which forces them to transfer at an express station just like the IND South Brooklyn line was intended to be. Your proposal also faces the problem of terminal capacity at the Brighton Beach station which can only handle one train service. So it's either the B or Q via Brighton express, it can't be both unfortunately.

And that’s why it wouldn’t work. Brighton can’t afford to lose capacity on its local tracks to a crosstown service that is likely to have very limited ridership. Where is the demand to go from Brighton Beach or Midwood to Middle Village?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, T to Dyre Avenue said:

And that’s why it wouldn’t work. Brighton can’t afford to lose capacity on its local tracks to a crosstown service that is likely to have very limited ridership. Where is the demand to go from Brighton Beach or Midwood to Middle Village?

The (Q) would (again!) not be affected.  It would remain a local with the new "black (V)" as well also running.  One would not affect the other as the (Q) would still be merging as it does now at Prospect Park going to Manhattan.  Only difference would be the other way.  You might have 1-2 (Q) trains per hour at peak times terminate at Sheepshead Bay, but that would not be enough to derail such a move for a line that would be a true crosstown between Southern Queens and Southern Brooklyn.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Wallyhorse said:

The (Q) would (again!) not be affected.  It would remain a local with the new "black (V)" as well also running.  One would not affect the other as the (Q) would still be merging as it does now at Prospect Park going to Manhattan.  Only difference would be the other way.  You might have 1-2 (Q) trains per hour at peak times terminate at Sheepshead Bay, but that would not be enough to derail such a move for a line that would be a true crosstown between Southern Queens and Southern Brooklyn.  

What? The (Q) is merging with your black (V) train because it'll be on the same track as it. I don't see how this is more useful than the other flying junction plan. You can just extend the Shuttle to Bedford-Nostrand rather than putting it on Myrtle. End of the day, nobody needs this service while Jamaica/Myrtle Riders need better service/to be upgraded to match the rest of the system. Building subways around Emegency Re-Routes over service that actual people need isn't a good plan. Yes, there should be flexibility but there also needs to be some sort of ridership that wants to go from Point A to Point B via the route. Your plan would result in *less* (Q) trains, which is the service that Brighton Riders prefer the most. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

(3) Train Extension Proposal 

 

Close 148 St. Extend 145 St into a full platform

 

Extend to Bronx via Exterior St & Jerome Av

 

161 St - Yankee Stadium/ Jerome Av (B)(D)(4)

167 St - Shakespeare Av/ Jerome Av

170 St / Edward J Grant Hwy

Featherbed Lane / University Av

Tremont Av/ University Av

Burnside Av - Bronx Community College/ University Av

183 St / University Av

Fordham Rd / University Av

Turn West on Kingsbridge Rd

Sedgwick Av-Kingsbridge Rd

Turn right on Bailey Av

Terminal. Kingsbridge 230 St

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, subwaykid256 said:

(3) Train Extension Proposal 

 

Close 148 St. Extend 145 St into a full platform

 

Extend to Bronx via Exterior St & Jerome Av

 

161 St - Yankee Stadium/ Jerome Av (B)(D)(4)

167 St - Shakespeare Av/ Jerome Av

170 St / Edward J Grant Hwy

Featherbed Lane / University Av

Tremont Av/ University Av

Burnside Av - Bronx Community College/ University Av

183 St / University Av

Fordham Rd / University Av

Turn West on Kingsbridge Rd

Sedgwick Av-Kingsbridge Rd

Turn right on Bailey Av

Terminal. Kingsbridge 230 St

It’s not the worst idea.. should probably transfer to the (1) at Broadway or swing crosstown. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So here are a few dumb proposals I thought of along with some other people. I don't know how well it could work and I'm pretty sure it might not or may never come to be like any other proposal here, but I'll give it my best. 

First Proposal:
I've been seeing a lot of talk when it comes to the (G) with a lot of people wanting to bring it back along QBL and many others disagreeing. I for one am one of those people that think it's better to not bring the (G) back into the mix as many people along QBL would rather have a local service that runs into Manhattan. The 11 St cut was practically brought in for that reason (might be missing a few things about it, but that's not really what I'm here to talk about). Seeing as Vanshnook and Queenslink recently put out a post about the Rockaway Beach Branch and the (G) is brought back to Forest Hills, I decided to look around to find better ways of running (G) service, even with CBTC implementations, there's only so much the MTA is willing to do for that line. I decided to take a page out of the (A) in the Rockaways put a new Wye between Greenpoint Av and 21 St. From there, that connection would lead right into Manhattan running underneath 34 St. 
The following stops for the new 34 St Line would be:

  • 2 Av
  • Park Av
  • 6 Av-Broadway (Herald Square)
  • 8 Av-Penn Station
  • 10 or 11 Av-Hudson Yards (this one is optional)

The (G) would operate from Church Av as the full time local along Culver (which would allow (F) trains to maybe run weekday express service along Culver, which would require reactivation of Bergen St lower level) via Crosstown and 34 St through the new Wye all the way to either Penn Station or Hudson Yards. Another line would be created in this instance which we'll call the (X) as a place holder and run from Forest Hills along Queens portion of Crosstown and onto 34 St terminating with the (G). Even with the development in LIC, there's only so much you could do with the (G)

Second Proposal:
This is where things start to take a really weird turn and is definitely a controversial one. Seeing as Rikers Island is planned on shutting down, I get the feeling that gentrification would happen. The place would 100% become a tourist attraction whether they decide to keep the place as is and use it like a museum or demolish everything and turn it into a residential area with a mall. I thought why not take advantage of this and have the Astoria Branch extended into the Island. Two new stops would be created in the process, a west side station and an east side station. I figured there could also be a place to put a yard or at least an elevated one for flood protection. While also doing this, I found the perfect opportunity and decided to extended the line even further running underground. There were two options of how I could approach this, one being extend it underground and underneath LaGuardia Airport and the other continuing north into the Bronx running a crosstown service along Hunts Point Av, 163 St, and 161 St.
The following stops include for both are:

  • 20 Av ((N)/(W))
  • Rikers Island East (3 track station with the middle meant for terminating Shuttle service) ((N)/(W)/(S))
    LGA Approach
  • Rikers Mall/Rikers Island West ((N)/(S)
  • LaGuardia Airport ((N)/(S))
    Bronx Approach
  • Halleck St ((W))
  • Spofford Av ((W))
  • Hunts Point Av ((W))
  • Prospect Av ((W))
  • 3 Av ((W))
  • Park Av (turns onto 161 St after 3 Av) ((W))
  • 161 St-Yankee Stadium (new lower level and new connection for redundancy purposes) ((W))

Ditmars Blvd would be converted to become a local station to allow for express service along the Astoria Branch, most likely the (W) would be doing that job since it's running into the Bronx. During late nights, the Bronx extension would become a shuttle between Yankee Stadium and Rikers Island East. I decided to go with the (N) to LGA with a LGA/Rikers Shuttle and the (W) to Yankees Stadium because more people would definitely want service into LGA. The Shuttle was put there to provide some extra help in case something were to happen with the (N) and at least have a connection with the (W). Unfortunately, I wasn't able to have a connection with the (W) extension to the (2) and (5) because there wasn't a way. Even moving the Prospect Av station onto Westchester Av wouldn't really make a difference as Intervale Av is still too far for a transfer. The Bronx extension might not happen and I doubt it would be cheap enough to warrant one. However, Rikers gives the MTA the advantage of being able to extend the (N) and (W) right into LGA, it might not be cheaper but at least people wouldn't be complaining of subway service running in their neighborhood. 

Both of these proposals are really controversial, especially the Rikers/LGA/Bronx extension of the Astoria line. However, this kind of crazy idea might help people get around the city much easier, getting to places faster than other services might (maybe, the (G) might not, but at least it got some improvement). Let me know what you guys think, if you agree or disagree and if there's anything you want to change.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 hours ago, Vulturious said:

So here are a few dumb proposals I thought of along with some other people. I don't know how well it could work and I'm pretty sure it might not or may never come to be like any other proposal here, but I'll give it my best. 

First Proposal:
I've been seeing a lot of talk when it comes to the (G) with a lot of people wanting to bring it back along QBL and many others disagreeing. I for one am one of those people that think it's better to not bring the (G) back into the mix as many people along QBL would rather have a local service that runs into Manhattan. The 11 St cut was practically brought in for that reason (might be missing a few things about it, but that's not really what I'm here to talk about). Seeing as Vanshnook and Queenslink recently put out a post about the Rockaway Beach Branch and the (G) is brought back to Forest Hills, I decided to look around to find better ways of running (G) service, even with CBTC implementations, there's only so much the MTA is willing to do for that line. I decided to take a page out of the (A) in the Rockaways put a new Wye between Greenpoint Av and 21 St. From there, that connection would lead right into Manhattan running underneath 34 St. 
The following stops for the new 34 St Line would be:

  • 2 Av
  • Park Av
  • 6 Av-Broadway (Herald Square)
  • 8 Av-Penn Station
  • 10 or 11 Av-Hudson Yards (this one is optional)

The (G) would operate from Church Av as the full time local along Culver (which would allow (F) trains to maybe run weekday express service along Culver, which would require reactivation of Bergen St lower level) via Crosstown and 34 St through the new Wye all the way to either Penn Station or Hudson Yards. Another line would be created in this instance which we'll call the (X) as a place holder and run from Forest Hills along Queens portion of Crosstown and onto 34 St terminating with the (G). Even with the development in LIC, there's only so much you could do with the (G)

Second Proposal:
This is where things start to take a really weird turn and is definitely a controversial one. Seeing as Rikers Island is planned on shutting down, I get the feeling that gentrification would happen. The place would 100% become a tourist attraction whether they decide to keep the place as is and use it like a museum or demolish everything and turn it into a residential area with a mall. I thought why not take advantage of this and have the Astoria Branch extended into the Island. Two new stops would be created in the process, a west side station and an east side station. I figured there could also be a place to put a yard or at least an elevated one for flood protection. While also doing this, I found the perfect opportunity and decided to extended the line even further running underground. There were two options of how I could approach this, one being extend it underground and underneath LaGuardia Airport and the other continuing north into the Bronx running a crosstown service along Hunts Point Av, 163 St, and 161 St.
The following stops include for both are:

  • 20 Av ((N)/(W))
  • Rikers Island East (3 track station with the middle meant for terminating Shuttle service) ((N)/(W)/(S))
    LGA Approach
  • Rikers Mall/Rikers Island West ((N)/(S)
  • LaGuardia Airport ((N)/(S))
    Bronx Approach
  • Halleck St ((W))
  • Spofford Av ((W))
  • Hunts Point Av ((W))
  • Prospect Av ((W))
  • 3 Av ((W))
  • Park Av (turns onto 161 St after 3 Av) ((W))
  • 161 St-Yankee Stadium (new lower level and new connection for redundancy purposes) ((W))

Ditmars Blvd would be converted to become a local station to allow for express service along the Astoria Branch, most likely the (W) would be doing that job since it's running into the Bronx. During late nights, the Bronx extension would become a shuttle between Yankee Stadium and Rikers Island East. I decided to go with the (N) to LGA with a LGA/Rikers Shuttle and the (W) to Yankees Stadium because more people would definitely want service into LGA. The Shuttle was put there to provide some extra help in case something were to happen with the (N) and at least have a connection with the (W). Unfortunately, I wasn't able to have a connection with the (W) extension to the (2) and (5) because there wasn't a way. Even moving the Prospect Av station onto Westchester Av wouldn't really make a difference as Intervale Av is still too far for a transfer. The Bronx extension might not happen and I doubt it would be cheap enough to warrant one. However, Rikers gives the MTA the advantage of being able to extend the (N) and (W) right into LGA, it might not be cheaper but at least people wouldn't be complaining of subway service running in their neighborhood. 

Both of these proposals are really controversial, especially the Rikers/LGA/Bronx extension of the Astoria line. However, this kind of crazy idea might help people get around the city much easier, getting to places faster than other services might (maybe, the (G) might not, but at least it got some improvement). Let me know what you guys think, if you agree or disagree and if there's anything you want to change.

In the past I proposed a Rikers Island stop, but as part of an extension of the (N) / (W) to The Bronx.  This would have the 20th Avenue stop you noted but then would go over a new bridge (with or without a stop on Rikers Island) and from there, reach the Bronx with the following stops:

Food Center Drive (possibly built as three tracks to allow for a short-turn terminal for the (N) or (W)), this would be the lone elevated stop going underground after this point.

3rd Street-Avenue A

Story Avenue (Bronx Charter High School)

Elder-Westchester Avenue (Transfer to (6))

Bronx River Avenue-East 174th Street

East 180th Street (Transfer to (2)(5))

Brady Avenue

Morris Park (Transfer to (5) )

Pelham Parkway-Jacobi Medical Center (Terminal)  




 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

First Proposal

Bring the (Q) to The Bronx. For some reason there are no transfers on the (6) in The Bronx and having the (Q) intersect the (6) at 138 St - 3 Av would be very efficient including a connection between the 2nd Av and Lexington Av lines. After 138 St - 3 Av it would continue to the :20x20_px_02: and (5) lines with a station at 143 St & 3 Av called 143 St - Mott Haven. This would give the 7th Av/Broadway and 2nd Av lines a connection. The (Q) would continue up 3rd Av until Fordham Plaza. Then it would turn onto Webster Av making stops until Gun Hill Rd. At Gun Hill Rd it would  turn onto Gun Hill Rd and then meet with the :20x20_px_02: and <5> at Gun Hill Rd Station.

New Stations

106 St at 106 St and 2 Av

116 St at 116 St and 2 Av

126 St at 126 St and 2 Av with connection to 125 St Station at 125 St and Lexington Av

143 St - Mott Haven at 143 St and 3 Av

Melrose Commons at 156 St and 3 Av

161 St at 161 St and 3 Av

167 St at 167 St and 3 Av

Claremont at Claremont Pkwy and 3 Av

Cross Bronx at Cross Bronx Expy and 3 Av

180 St at 180 St and 3 Av

Lorillard Pl at Lorillard Pl and 3 Av

Fordham Plaza at Fordham Rd and 3 Av

197 St - Fordham University at 197 St and Webster Av

Mosholu Pkwy at Mosholu Pkwy and Webster Av

Parkside Pl at Parkside Pl and Webster Av

210 St at Gun Hill Rd and Webster Av

 

Second Proposal

 

Astoria Shore to Pelham Bay Line. The (W) would need to be cut back for this one. The (W) would be cut back to Lexington Av - 59 St to go into Queens a different way. It would have a stop at the Roosevelt Island Bridge and then it would go to 21 St and 30 Av for the next stop. Then it would go up 21 St to Ditmars Blvd where there would be a new shuttle connecting the two Ditmars Blvd stations. From there it would go into Hunts Point stopping at Tiffany St and then going across Oak Point Av. After Oak Point Av is finished it will then go on Randall Av to Castle Hill Av and then up Castle Hill Av to meet with the (6) where it would terminate.

New Stations

Roosevelt Island Bridge at Main St and Roosevelt Island Bridge

30 Av at 30 Av and 21 St

Hoyt Av at Hoyt Av and 21 St

23 Rd at 23 Rd and 21 St

Ditmars Blvd - 21 St at Ditmars Blvd and 21 St

20 Av at 20 Av and 21 St

Tiffany St at Tiffany St and Oak Point Av

Longfellow Av - Whittier St at Oak Point Av between Longfellow Av and Whittier St

Avenue E at Avenue E and Oak Point Av (There is an Avenue E in The Bronx you can search it on google maps)

Soundview Av at Soundview Av between Randall Av and Lancombe Av

Castle Hill-Randall Avs at Castle Hill Av and Randall Av

Hermany Av at Hermany Av and Castle Hill Av

Unionport at Haviland Av and Castle Hill Av

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here's every IRT route on my map

:25x25_px_01: : 263 St - Broadway to South Ferry via Broadway Local, 7 Av Local, Greenwich St Local.

:20x20_px_02:: Wakefield - 241 St to Kings Plaza via White Plains Rd Local, Westchester Av/Southern Blvd Local, Lenox Av Local, Broadway Express, 7 Av Express, Eastern Pkwy Local, Nostrand Av Local, Flatbush Av Local.

(3): Unchanged.

(4): Woodlawn to New Lots Av via Jerome Av Local, Lexington Av/Park Av Express, Lafayette St Express, Eastern Pkwy Express.

(5): Eastchester - Dyre Av to Brighton Beach via Esplanade Av Local, Westchester Av/Southern Blvd Local (Express during rush hours), Lexington Av/Park Av Express, Lafayette St Express, Eastern Pkwy Express, Upper Nostrand Av Express, Lower Nostrand Av Local, Manhattan Beach Local.

(6): Unchanged.

(7): Added 10 Av - 40 St Station.

:8:: Avenue E to Brooklyn Bridge - City Hall via Lafayette Av (Bronx) Local, Pelham Line Local, Lexington Av/Park Av Local and Lafayette St (Manhattan) Local.

(9): Avenue E to South Ferry via Lafayette Av (Bronx) Express, Pelham Line Express, 125 St (IRT) Local, Broadway Local, 7 Av Local, Greenwich St Local.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

43 minutes ago, 2Av said:

First Proposal

Bring the (Q) to The Bronx. For some reason there are no transfers on the (6) in The Bronx and having the (Q) intersect the (6) at 138 St - 3 Av would be very efficient including a connection between the 2nd Av and Lexington Av lines. After 138 St - 3 Av it would continue to the :20x20_px_02: and (5) lines with a station at 143 St & 3 Av called 143 St - Mott Haven. This would give the 7th Av/Broadway and 2nd Av lines a connection. The (Q) would continue up 3rd Av until Fordham Plaza. Then it would turn onto Webster Av making stops until Gun Hill Rd. At Gun Hill Rd it would  turn onto Gun Hill Rd and then meet with the :20x20_px_02: and <5> at Gun Hill Rd Station.

New Stations

106 St at 106 St and 2 Av

116 St at 116 St and 2 Av

126 St at 126 St and 2 Av with connection to 125 St Station at 125 St and Lexington Av

143 St - Mott Haven at 143 St and 3 Av

Melrose Commons at 156 St and 3 Av

161 St at 161 St and 3 Av

167 St at 167 St and 3 Av

Claremont at Claremont Pkwy and 3 Av

Cross Bronx at Cross Bronx Expy and 3 Av

180 St at 180 St and 3 Av

Lorillard Pl at Lorillard Pl and 3 Av

Fordham Plaza at Fordham Rd and 3 Av

197 St - Fordham University at 197 St and Webster Av

Mosholu Pkwy at Mosholu Pkwy and Webster Av

Parkside Pl at Parkside Pl and Webster Av

210 St at Gun Hill Rd and Webster Av

 

Second Proposal

 

Astoria Shore to Pelham Bay Line. The (W) would need to be cut back for this one. The (W) would be cut back to Lexington Av - 59 St to go into Queens a different way. It would have a stop at the Roosevelt Island Bridge and then it would go to 21 St and 30 Av for the next stop. Then it would go up 21 St to Ditmars Blvd where there would be a new shuttle connecting the two Ditmars Blvd stations. From there it would go into Hunts Point stopping at Tiffany St and then going across Oak Point Av. After Oak Point Av is finished it will then go on Randall Av to Castle Hill Av and then up Castle Hill Av to meet with the (6) where it would terminate.

New Stations

Roosevelt Island Bridge at Main St and Roosevelt Island Bridge

30 Av at 30 Av and 21 St

Hoyt Av at Hoyt Av and 21 St

23 Rd at 23 Rd and 21 St

Ditmars Blvd - 21 St at Ditmars Blvd and 21 St

20 Av at 20 Av and 21 St

Tiffany St at Tiffany St and Oak Point Av

Longfellow Av - Whittier St at Oak Point Av between Longfellow Av and Whittier St

Avenue E at Avenue E and Oak Point Av (There is an Avenue E in The Bronx you can search it on google maps)

Soundview Av at Soundview Av between Randall Av and Lancombe Av

Castle Hill-Randall Avs at Castle Hill Av and Randall Av

Hermany Av at Hermany Av and Castle Hill Av

Unionport at Haviland Av and Castle Hill Av

 

 

 

I made a longer post but that got deleted so to put everything briefly. Your (Q) train doesn't need to stop at 126th - 2nd Ave for a transfer because you have more direct transfer to the (6)(2) and (5) trains. Some stations are at weird intersections that put them too close to other stations (143, Melrose Commons, and Lorillard Pl on your (Q) and Avenue E, 23 Rd, and Hemrany Av on the (W)), you also have the (W) making too many stops in one area. You only needed 3 stops in the Bronx to connect with the (6) at Castle Hill and that's really just the (6) station, Castle Hill/Randall Av and Hunts Point Av. You don't even need to have the (W) train on 21 St, you can just extend the Astoria Line (though it could probably just go to LaGuardia for all of that work.) 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, 2Av said:

Here's every IRT route on my map

(5): Eastchester - Dyre Av to Brighton Beach via Esplanade Av Local, Westchester Av/Southern Blvd Local (Express during rush hours), Lexington Av/Park Av Express, Lafayette St Express, Eastern Pkwy Express, Upper Nostrand Av Express, Lower Nostrand Av Local, Manhattan Beach Local.

:8:: Avenue E to Brooklyn Bridge - City Hall via Lafayette Av (Bronx) Local, Pelham Line Local, Lexington Av/Park Av Local and Lafayette St (Manhattan) Local.

(9): Avenue E to South Ferry via Lafayette Av (Bronx) Express, Pelham Line Express, 125 St (IRT) Local, Broadway Local, 7 Av Local, Greenwich St Local.

I'm gonna need you to elaborate for these 3 because what in the WORLD is on Avenue E that people are just dying to go there? Why Avenue E specifically? Why is the (9) running on Pelham? Why is the (9) express and why is it going crosstown on 125th St? and why are you listing every street all these trains run on but i still have no idea what's going on with Nostrand/the (5). And why doesn't the (2) have Upper/Lower like the (5) does? I understand all the other ones except for maybe the (4) since the (3) and (4) both terminating at New Lots isn't possible. and the (7) can't just have a stop on 40th St/10th Av, just make it 42/10th, it's a two block difference.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Theli11 said:

I'm gonna need you to elaborate for these 3 because what in the WORLD is on Avenue E that people are just dying to go there? Why Avenue E specifically? Why is the (9) running on Pelham? Why is the (9) express and why is it going crosstown on 125th St? and why are you listing every street all these trains run on but i still have no idea what's going on with Nostrand/the (5). And why doesn't the (2) have Upper/Lower like the (5) does? I understand all the other ones except for maybe the (4) since the (3) and (4) both terminating at New Lots isn't possible. and the (7) can't just have a stop on 40th St/10th Av, just make it 42/10th, it's a two block difference.

 

The :8: and (9) are running on the Pelham Line from Longwood Av to 125 St. The :20x20_px_02: runs on Nostrand from President St to Brooklyn College, before turning onto Flatbush Av to go to Kings Plaza. The (5) runs express on Nostrand Av while the :20x20_px_02: runs local, but after the :20x20_px_02: turns onto Flatbush, the (5) continues down Nostrand. Also Avenue E was just a central location by the shopping district there and I'm not the only one who put a station there. I think I would actually want to move the 10 Av station to 42 St now, and the (4) could just go down Utica Av to Kings Plaza.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 7/10/2021 at 3:41 AM, Vulturious said:

So here are a few dumb proposals I thought of along with some other people. I don't know how well it could work and I'm pretty sure it might not or may never come to be like any other proposal here, but I'll give it my best. 

First Proposal:
I've been seeing a lot of talk when it comes to the (G) with a lot of people wanting to bring it back along QBL and many others disagreeing. I for one am one of those people that think it's better to not bring the (G) back into the mix as many people along QBL would rather have a local service that runs into Manhattan. The 11 St cut was practically brought in for that reason (might be missing a few things about it, but that's not really what I'm here to talk about). Seeing as Vanshnook and Queenslink recently put out a post about the Rockaway Beach Branch and the (G) is brought back to Forest Hills, I decided to look around to find better ways of running (G) service, even with CBTC implementations, there's only so much the MTA is willing to do for that line. I decided to take a page out of the (A) in the Rockaways put a new Wye between Greenpoint Av and 21 St. From there, that connection would lead right into Manhattan running underneath 34 St. 
The following stops for the new 34 St Line would be:

  • 2 Av
  • Park Av
  • 6 Av-Broadway (Herald Square)
  • 8 Av-Penn Station
  • 10 or 11 Av-Hudson Yards (this one is optional)

The (G) would operate from Church Av as the full time local along Culver (which would allow (F) trains to maybe run weekday express service along Culver, which would require reactivation of Bergen St lower level) via Crosstown and 34 St through the new Wye all the way to either Penn Station or Hudson Yards. Another line would be created in this instance which we'll call the (X) as a place holder and run from Forest Hills along Queens portion of Crosstown and onto 34 St terminating with the (G). Even with the development in LIC, there's only so much you could do with the (G)

Second Proposal:
This is where things start to take a really weird turn and is definitely a controversial one. Seeing as Rikers Island is planned on shutting down, I get the feeling that gentrification would happen. The place would 100% become a tourist attraction whether they decide to keep the place as is and use it like a museum or demolish everything and turn it into a residential area with a mall. I thought why not take advantage of this and have the Astoria Branch extended into the Island. Two new stops would be created in the process, a west side station and an east side station. I figured there could also be a place to put a yard or at least an elevated one for flood protection. While also doing this, I found the perfect opportunity and decided to extended the line even further running underground. There were two options of how I could approach this, one being extend it underground and underneath LaGuardia Airport and the other continuing north into the Bronx running a crosstown service along Hunts Point Av, 163 St, and 161 St.
The following stops include for both are:

  • 20 Av ((N)/(W))
  • Rikers Island East (3 track station with the middle meant for terminating Shuttle service) ((N)/(W)/(S))
    LGA Approach
  • Rikers Mall/Rikers Island West ((N)/(S)
  • LaGuardia Airport ((N)/(S))
    Bronx Approach
  • Halleck St ((W))
  • Spofford Av ((W))
  • Hunts Point Av ((W))
  • Prospect Av ((W))
  • 3 Av ((W))
  • Park Av (turns onto 161 St after 3 Av) ((W))
  • 161 St-Yankee Stadium (new lower level and new connection for redundancy purposes) ((W))

Ditmars Blvd would be converted to become a local station to allow for express service along the Astoria Branch, most likely the (W) would be doing that job since it's running into the Bronx. During late nights, the Bronx extension would become a shuttle between Yankee Stadium and Rikers Island East. I decided to go with the (N) to LGA with a LGA/Rikers Shuttle and the (W) to Yankees Stadium because more people would definitely want service into LGA. The Shuttle was put there to provide some extra help in case something were to happen with the (N) and at least have a connection with the (W). Unfortunately, I wasn't able to have a connection with the (W) extension to the (2) and (5) because there wasn't a way. Even moving the Prospect Av station onto Westchester Av wouldn't really make a difference as Intervale Av is still too far for a transfer. The Bronx extension might not happen and I doubt it would be cheap enough to warrant one. However, Rikers gives the MTA the advantage of being able to extend the (N) and (W) right into LGA, it might not be cheaper but at least people wouldn't be complaining of subway service running in their neighborhood. 

Both of these proposals are really controversial, especially the Rikers/LGA/Bronx extension of the Astoria line. However, this kind of crazy idea might help people get around the city much easier, getting to places faster than other services might (maybe, the (G) might not, but at least it got some improvement). Let me know what you guys think, if you agree or disagree and if there's anything you want to change.

I’ve seen the idea presented in your first proposal before, to extend an (X) service off the Crosstown Line into Midtown Manhattan. I wonder if it can function as a sort of relief valve for the (L), which is hopelessly overcrowded with no easy affordable way to relieve it long-term (i.e., adding two extra tracks to the (L)). But I wouldn’t run it from Forest Hills because the QB line has enough reverse branching as it is and doesn’t need any extra. So maybe an (X) that runs alongside the (G) in its Brooklyn section. 

For direct Bronx-Queens service, I’ve always favored the Rx proposal. I feel extending the (N)(W) into The Bronx would make both lines too long. That on top of the 34th St merge that already makes them unreliable.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, T to Dyre Avenue said:

I’ve seen the idea presented in your first proposal before, to extend an (X) service off the Crosstown Line into Midtown Manhattan. I wonder if it can function as a sort of relief valve for the (L), which is hopelessly overcrowded with no easy affordable way to relieve it long-term (i.e., adding two extra tracks to the (L)). But I wouldn’t run it from Forest Hills because the QB line has enough reverse branching as it is and doesn’t need any extra. So maybe an (X) that runs alongside the (G) in its Brooklyn section. 

For direct Bronx-Queens service, I’ve always favored the Rx proposal. I feel extending the (N)(W) into The Bronx would make both lines too long. That on top of the 34th St merge that already makes them unreliable.

I see what you mean, however both of these proposals are coming from a sort-of deinterlined subway system. I used Vanshnook's idea to deinterline Dekalb with a few changes made from it.

(D) and (N) trains swap lines in Brooklyn with the (N) running what his version of the (R) runs from Coney Island to Astoria all local. The (W) runs as the Brighton Express, but runs local from Dekalb with the (N) on Broadway to the Bronx. Yes, it might be a little too long, but we got lines like the (A) running all local during late night to Far Rockaway. Same with the current (R) that runs on its own during the weekends along QBL. There is a plus side to this, while yes the (N) and (W) would be too long, especially the (W), the (W) is express in both Brooklyn and Queens. As I mentioned earlier, Ditmars Blvd would be converted to be a local station to allow for express service along the 31 St line. The (N) might not get that advantage that the (W) gets, but it doesn't run a much longer service compared to what it currently does during late nights anyway. (N) trains are mainly just running local while also having 4 extra stops compared to the (W) which I doubt will hurt the line that much. Only merges involved here are just between both lines while the (Q) only has just one merge which is the (W). So technically, Broadway is deinterlined to an extent, but no more of that annoying merge issue around Dekalb junction. 

As for the (X) along QBL, because there is no (R) service it would be the perfect line to run replace it. I also decided to go with swapping the (F) and (M) with the (F) along 53 St and the (M) along 63 St. Weekend and late night service, the (F) replaces the (M) along 63 St which would run its current service to Jamaica-179 St. People might still want that Broadway service along QBL, but the (F) and (M) already meets up and runs close to Broadway stops anyway. An added bonus here is that QBL has less merging especially with the (E) not having to deal with the (M) along 53 St to then merge with the (F) later on. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Navy Blue (O)

Bronx

Norwood - 205 St (B) (D)

Bedford Park Blvd (B)(D)

Kingsbridge Rd (B)(D)

Fordham Rd (B)(D)

182-183 Sts (B)

Tremont Av (B)(D)(P)

174-175 Sts (B)

170 St (B)

167 St (B)

161 St - Yankee Stadium (B)(D)(4)

Manhattan

142 St (P)(V)(X)(Y)

125 St (P)(V)(X)(Y)

110 St - Duke Ellington Cir (P)(V)(X)(Y)

96 St (P)(V)(X)(Y)

72 St/5 Av (K)(P)(V)(Y)

Grand Army Sq (P)(V)(Y)

5 Av/53 St (E)(P)(V)(Y)

14 St (P)(Y)(L)

Sullivan St

W 4 St - Washington Sq (A)(B)(C):D:(E)(F)(M)(V)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 hours ago, 2Av said:

Navy Blue (O)

Bronx

Norwood - 205 St (B) (D)

Bedford Park Blvd (B)(D)

Kingsbridge Rd (B)(D)

Fordham Rd (B)(D)

182-183 Sts (B)

Tremont Av (B)(D)(P)

174-175 Sts (B)

170 St (B)

167 St (B)

161 St - Yankee Stadium (B)(D)(4)

Manhattan

142 St (P)(V)(X)(Y)

125 St (P)(V)(X)(Y)

110 St - Duke Ellington Cir (P)(V)(X)(Y)

96 St (P)(V)(X)(Y)

72 St/5 Av (K)(P)(V)(Y)

Grand Army Sq (P)(V)(Y)

5 Av/53 St (E)(P)(V)(Y)

14 St (P)(Y)(L)

Sullivan St

W 4 St - Washington Sq (A)(B)(C):D:(E)(F)(M)(V)

I'm assuming this is on 5th Avenue, but there's no way in the world you'd close 5th Av to build a subway there. 
5th Av is right in the middle of Union Square and 6th Av (stations), it'd be a walkway to connect to the (L) and seeing that you don't have transfers to either (N)(Q)(R)(W)(4)(5)(6) or (F)(M)(1)(2)(3) you don't know which one you'd choose either. 

It'd probably do better if you elaborated where your (P) (Y) (X) and (V) trains fit in this equation but you'd also have 3 trains on your 6th Avenue, and there's 5 trains on 5th Avenue so I'm assuming there's going to also be 3 on one track there too. Nuff said with the way this proposal is, it'd be much clear with the other trains in mind as well. (though suggesting a train on 5th Av is a non starter).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.