Department of Subways - Proposals/Ideas

[Vistausss]

Nah, bobtehpanda and lirr42 convinced me recently separation isn't needed by the FRA.

[B35 via Church]

Right now they are working on turning the Atlantic Branch( Jamaica-Flatbush) into scoot service. That's another way of saying shuttle service. Supposedly this happens when ESA begins and Penn Station and Grand Central become the main western terminals. I think it's rather doubtful the LIRR will offer weekday City Ticket when their focus seems to be packing their trains out east and treating city dwellers as red headed stepchildren. Heck, in my lifetime the railroad has eliminated stops and entire branches within NYC limits.

The way I see it, it's been scoot service...... How many lines from deep in LI run directly to Atlantic Terminal....

[T to Dyre Avenue]

Hempstead and Far Rock do. There's also limited rush hour service from (I think) Long Beach and West Hempstead.

[Vistausss]

Not sure about Long Beach but (almost) all West Hempstead trains terminate at Atlantic Terminal, not only in rush hour. And IIRC there's at least one Babylon train starting at Atlantic in the PM rush.

Edited October 5, 2013 by Vistausss

[N6 Limited]

As for the Brooklyn Scoot Service, where would Hempstead and Far Rockaway Trains Terminate?

 

Could They Possibly offer a Atlantic Terminal, Belmont Park/Queens Village, scoot service that accepts City Ticket fares 24/7?

The extended subway would serve present riders from Hollis and QV. Most of the folks want the subway anyway, so this would be a godsend for them.

But the big issue here would be dealing with that textbook-example of bureaucratic over-regulation, the FRA. The FRA does not like it when transit and mainline rail run on the same tracks and even makes a stink over transit and mainline trains running too close to each other on the same r.o.w. - even if on separate tracks. They do allow waivers, but as far as I know, they require some sort of time separation. That's not possible as far as subways and LIRR sharing the same train line is concerned.

What exactly is the purpose of this separation?

 

Nah, bobtehpanda and lirr42 convinced me recently separation isn't needed by the FRA.

How so?

[bobtehpanda]

The amount of property acquisition needed for a two track subway line (as well as a LIRR Third Track, because that would be necessary at some point in the future) would never fly. Plus, Hillside Avenue is a much better corridor to serve in terms of overall network connectivity with other bus lines.

 

The would be better off going down Merrick.

 

Nah, bobtehpanda and lirr42 convinced me recently separation isn't needed by the FRA.

 

I have never said anything of the sort. When talking about the Bay Ridge Branch, I meant running the same tracks alongside, which is not the same thing and not specifically prohibited by FRA (See: Boston Orange Line and NEC)

In any case, all the LIRR ROWs are generally bad subway ROWS, because they generally are parallel to but quite far from commercial corridors that would provide a strong anchor. PW is too far from Northern, the Main Line is far from QB and Jamaica Av (which isn't even that big compared to Hillside), and SE Queens just cuts through everything.

 

If anyone can find an example of recent construction that was forced to build a lot of separation between parallel FRA and non-FRA compliant lines, then they are more than welcome to provide proof.

 

(Besides, FRA is only doing this because for some reason FRA has decided that building tanks for trains is the way to go, even though the car industry realized that this was not safe for the people inside a long time ago.)

Edited October 5, 2013 by bobtehpanda

[Mysterious2train]

Not sure about Long Beach but (almost) all West Hempstead trains terminate at Atlantic Terminal, not only in rush hour. And IIRC there's at least one Babylon train starting at Atlantic in the PM rush.

 

Not true. Off-Peak on weekdays, there are only 3 West Hempstead trains that actually go to Flatbush (1 WB in the afternoon, 2 EB in the afternoon); 3 trains end at Jamaica, and 12 trains start/end at Valley Stream. 

[Vistausss]

Well, then that schedule is kinda rigged because the LIRR schedule website (where I plan a trip from WH to Atlantic) shows more direct trains to Atlantic.

[T to Dyre Avenue]

Some of the trips you're looking at may involve changing at Jamaica. The system shows direct and transfer trips. It also doesn't tell you where the second train is coming from because most people looking at the schedules don't need that info.

[Vistausss]

I know. I'm not blind. I've seen some transfers in the results. Those I've excluded and even then it still shows more direct trains to Atlantic than the PDF schedule.

[B35 via Church]

Hempstead and Far Rock do. There's also limited rush hour service from (I think) Long Beach and West Hempstead.

Yes, that's why I said deep into LI... I board a Far Rockaway train every weekday morning now to xfer over to a Huntington train (for Mineola)..... You're also right w/ the other 3 lines (Hempstead, W. Hempstead, Long Beach) that serve Atlantic Terminal.....

 

Point I was makin basically was, there isn't a line that runs directly from suffolk county to Atlantic terminal... Every single one of those lines either emanates from Penn or Jamaica, due east.... Meaning, if those folks want Barclays (or just downtown Bklyn. in general), they are in fact, transferring.....

[T to Dyre Avenue]

The amount of property acquisition needed for a two track subway line (as well as a LIRR Third Track, because that would be necessary at some point in the future) would never fly. Plus, Hillside Avenue is a much better corridor to serve in terms of overall network connectivity with other bus lines.

 

The would be better off going down Merrick.

 

 

I have never said anything of the sort. When talking about the Bay Ridge Branch, I meant running the same tracks alongside, which is not the same thing and not specifically prohibited by FRA (See: Boston Orange Line and NEC)

 

In any case, all the LIRR ROWs are generally bad subway ROWS, because they generally are parallel to but quite far from commercial corridors that would provide a strong anchor. PW is too far from Northern, the Main Line is far from QB and Jamaica Av (which isn't even that big compared to Hillside), and SE Queens just cuts through everything.

 

If anyone can find an example of recent construction that was forced to build a lot of separation between parallel FRA and non-FRA compliant lines, then they are more than welcome to provide proof.

 

(Besides, FRA is only doing this because for some reason FRA has decided that building tanks for trains is the way to go, even though the car industry realized that this was not safe for the people inside a long time ago.)

Agree about how far LIRR ROWs are from commercial corridors - especially in the case of Hillside Ave. That's where the major commercial activity is in Hollis and QV and there is heavy traffic on Hillside - auto and bus. Between that, the already high number of trains already using the Main Line, and the shelving of the third track, there isn't room for subways trains on that ROW, extending the to at least Braddock Ave is the way to go here. 

 

As for PW, east of Bayside the ROW is far from Northern Blvd, so at that point it does make a lousy subway ROW. But west of Bayside station, it's not too far away. And Bayside station is located on a major commercial corridor on Bell Blvd. There's a clearing east of the station that used to be used for maintenance equipment. So maybe some sort of short-turn service at City Ticket fares to/from Bayside could be provided to service riders in Bayside and East Flushing who currently have to deal with the at Flushing.

[Vistausss]

Wow wow, the has capacity issues enough, let's first fix those before we extend its route.

Edited October 6, 2013 by Vistausss

[bobtehpanda]

Wow wow, the has capacity issues enough, let's first fix those before we extend its route.

 

If we wait for a Queens Blvd bypass, we're not going to see any extension in Queens within our lifetimes.

 

It's necessary, but this requires a eastern Queens politician to think about something other than cars and parking. I'm not sure if that extremely vague promise by that QBP candidate counted for anything.

Edited October 6, 2013 by bobtehpanda

[AndrewJC]

Aside from the questions of the extension itself, I seriously question the idea of a park-and-ride in the first place - the opportunity cost is immense.

 

We could build a subway extension with a vast parking lot at the terminal. It would be very attractive for Long Islanders who want to drive partway into Manhattan during rush hours, but it wouldn't be very useful locally, since any nearby residential and commercial development would require a long walk across a parking lot to reach the station.

 

I'd much prefer instead to see a subway extension into a dense mixed-use residential/commercial area, to improve transit access without resorting to cars and so that the extension sees traffic outside rush hours.

[T to Dyre Avenue]

Wow wow, the has capacity issues enough, let's first fix those before we extend its route.

They aren't going to be fixed because in order to run more trains, you'll have to cut service on the . No other way to do it without building Queens Blvd bypass tracks. Cutting service on the will not go well with its riders. A modest four-station extension to Springfield Blvd - without a park-and-ride - is not going to cause a major meltdown on the .

 

Aside from the questions of the extension itself, I seriously question the idea of a park-and-ride in the first place - the opportunity cost is immense.

 

We could build a subway extension with a vast parking lot at the terminal. It would be very attractive for Long Islanders who want to drive partway into Manhattan during rush hours, but it wouldn't be very useful locally, since any nearby residential and commercial development would require a long walk across a parking lot to reach the station.

 

I'd much prefer instead to see a subway extension into a dense mixed-use residential/commercial area, to improve transit access without resorting to cars and so that the extension sees traffic outside rush hours.

The park-and-ride construction costs would be immense and I doubt the MTA would be able to recover those costs in any short period of time. But the subway extension itself would be very useful. The area on and around Hillside Ave is very busy, traffic is heavy and many well-used bus routes travel on Hillside as far as Springfield Blvd/Braddock Ave. East of Braddock is a different story because the development and density drop off significantly at that point.

Edited October 8, 2013 by T to Dyre Avenue

[bobtehpanda]

The park-and-ride construction costs would be immense and I doubt the MTA would be able to recover those costs in any short period of time. But the subway extension itself would be very useful. The area on and around Hillside Ave is very busy, traffic is heavy and many well-used bus routes travel on Hillside as far as Springfield Blvd/Braddock Ave. East of Braddock is a different story because the development and density drop off significantly at that point.

 

Springfield would be the perfect point to terminate an extension - not only is the intersection ridiculously wide and a hub for bus routes, but it's also the point where congestion is basically nonexistent further east. It would do wonders for bus operations in Eastern Queens - the Q43 and Q1 would be able to operate with improved reliability if some or all buses terminated at Springfield/Hillside (in a similar way to the 179th St Q110 service)

[Airplanepilotgod8888]

11 avenue line 

14 street park - Van Cortlandt Park-252 street

https://mapsengine.google.com/map/edit?mid=zIdJ_la9iRKc.k8dlZGsqSH0Y

 

14 street park

23 street-11 Avenue 

33 street

42 street-11 Avenue transfer is available  to  , , , , , , , and lexington avenue  , ,

51 street

59 street-West End

66 street

72 street-West End , ,

81 street

88 street

96 street  , ,

103 street-West End  on weekends only

107 street

116 street-Columbia University 1

125 street 1

137 street-City College 1

145 street 1

157 street 1

168 street 1

181 street 1

191 street 1

Dyckman street 1

207 street 1

215 street 1

Marble Hill-225 street 1

231 street 1

Van Cortlandt Park-242 street

Van Cortlandt Park-252 street

 

 

 

[T to Dyre Avenue]

I think you may be onto something here, especially given that MTA is already extending the to the 34th St and 11th Ave. It also looks like you want to run this 9 service via the existing line in Upper Manhattan. Piggy-back onto the and lines, then connect them build new construction between 42nd and 72nd Streets for the 9. This would be a realistic way to do a new West Side subway line. It would also have a side benefit of connecting the to the rest of the A-division.

Edited October 10, 2013 by T to Dyre Avenue

[N6 Limited]

Another location for a Park and Ride would be the Kew Gardens Interchange/Union Turnpike Station. Perfect location. Jackie Robinson Parkway, Grand Central Parkway, Van Wyck Expressway, Queens Blvd and Union Turnpike!   and express trains. 

 

And before the wolves come out,  I've noticed that a lot of you like to say QB Express is at capacity, but you're basing this off of 1 hour of service per day? Seriously? 

[bobtehpanda]

Another location for a Park and Ride would be the Kew Gardens Interchange/Union Turnpike Station. Perfect location. Jackie Robinson Parkway, Grand Central Parkway, Van Wyck Expressway, Queens Blvd and Union Turnpike!   and express trains. 

 

And before the wolves come out,  I've noticed that a lot of you like to say QB Express is at capacity, but you're basing this off of 1 hour of service per day? Seriously? 

 

The Queens Boulevard line is the second busiest trunk line in the city after Lexington Avenue, and standing-room-only trains leave Union at many hours of the day. It currently has the shortest headways of any subway line in the city, including the Lexington Avenue Line. To say that it needs capacity relief is an understatement.

 

Actually, that would be the perfect place to not put a P&R. P&R lots are essentially black holes for traffic, and because they're so commute oriented they dump a large amount of traffic onto roads in a very short amount of time. You'd end up jamming all those roads and highways you listed because everyone would be trying to get in and out of lots at the same time, and this would make that area even more of a knot during rush hour than it is today.

 

It would also be very tricky to build; you probably wouldn't be able to build enough parking no matter how hard you tried, and the interchange is scheduled for a multi-year reconfiguration project to make it less confusing for drivers. It's also far enough into the city that it wouldn't really save any time to use the P&R over subway+bus, since that area gets congested during the peak.

[N6 Limited]

The Queens Boulevard line is the second busiest trunk line in the city after Lexington Avenue, and standing-room-only trains leave Union at many hours of the day. It currently has the shortest headways of any subway line in the city, including the Lexington Avenue Line. To say that it needs capacity relief is an understatement.

 

Actually, that would be the perfect place to not put a P&R. P&R lots are essentially black holes for traffic, and because they're so commute oriented they dump a large amount of traffic onto roads in a very short amount of time. You'd end up jamming all those roads and highways you listed because everyone would be trying to get in and out of lots at the same time, and this would make that area even more of a knot during rush hour than it is today.

 

It would also be very tricky to build; you probably wouldn't be able to build enough parking no matter how hard you tried, and the interchange is scheduled for a multi-year reconfiguration project to make it less confusing for drivers. It's also far enough into the city that it wouldn't really save any time to use the P&R over subway+bus, since that area gets congested during the peak.

I've been on early morning  trains where the train is basically full approaching Union Turnpike. (Well, one morning there were no trains at 179th street waiting, so bus after bus was spilling people down in to the subway for several mins then two trains pulled in. The first R46 left and most of the seats were taken before getting to 169th street, then all seats were taken and it was SRO to Union Turnpike as more and more people got on. Some got off, but they were quickly replaced, at 71st Ave there was relief as people transferred to the local. There's exchange at Roosevelt Ave, and then relief at Lexington Ave, then the normal tapering down 6th ave)

 

But yes, the line is busy, but I ride it every day. but it is not full all day, there is capacity for riders outside of the peak-peak time of morning rush. If you get to the subway around 9am or later it's "normal". In the evenings people trickle home as they please so the trains aren't as packed. I've been on trains were the car is basically empty or have like 10 people.

 

Also, of course the frequency is warranted because it's essentially the lone subway trunk serving a large area of Queens and Western Nassau county. (Those bus lines really expand that service area). 

As for location they can build it right over the Jamaica Yard  . 

[Roadcruiser1]

Instead of spending the money on Park and Ride it did make more sense to use that money to extend the current subway lines in Queens farther East which would also solve the problem.........

[bobtehpanda]

Instead of spending the money on Park and Ride it did make more sense to use that money to extend the current subway lines in Queens farther East which would also solve the problem.........

 

Not to mention, it would also not require building something that would primarily benefit suburbanites over city people... People in the city use bus+subway specifically to avoid the costs of commuting with a car.

[N6 Limited]

Instead of spending the money on Park and Ride it did make more sense to use that money to extend the current subway lines in Queens farther East which would also solve the problem.........

Extending the lines further East would not solve the problem as most people would still have to take the bus to the subway. The idea of a park and ride is to have somewhere to park your car so that you can use public transportation as well. A lot of people in eastern queens have vehicles and drive.

Not to mention, it would also not require building something that would primarily benefit suburbanites over city people... People in the city use bus+subway specifically to avoid the costs of commuting with a car.

At that point city people are suburbanites. I use the bus and subway to avoid the costs of commuting with a car, but there are times ( in general) where simply driving to the subway is just so much better. Now, I don't drive to 179th or 169th, because parking is atrocious. But if it's a Sunday or after 7PM I''ll get right on the Grand Central to Union Turnpike, Park and walk right down into the subway. or comes, perfect.

 

On the way back I can take the or , get off at Union Turnpike, walk to the car, get on the GCP in no time. As opposed to staying on the train longer, then waiting for the bus, then a 20 min bus ride, and then walking home. (although walking is good for you)