Subway Extension to Secaucus (Flushing #7 or L Canarsie)

Discussion relating to the past and present operations of the NYC Subway, PATH, and Staten Island Railway (SIRT).

Moderator: GirlOnTheTrain

Re: Subway Extension to Secaucus (Flushing #7 or L Canarsie)

Postby trainbrain » Tue May 09, 2017 12:38 pm

Instead of the 7 line being extended into NJ, it should be extended further into Queens. It could split at it's current terminus with one branch going up to College Point and the other going toward the Whitestone Bridge. That line has enough frequency to support a split and it still maintains the same frequency on the current portion of the line.
trainbrain
 
Posts: 342
Joined: Sun May 12, 2013 7:11 pm

Re: Subway Extension to Secaucus (Flushing #7 or L Canarsie)

Postby GirlOnTheTrain » Tue May 09, 2017 2:26 pm

You have NIMBYs crying about an N extension to LGA - a 7 extension would go over just as well...
"I am no longer just a girl on the train, going back and forth without point or purpose."

Moderator: Amtrak, MTA Metro-North, MTA New York City Subway/PATH/NYC Area Light Rail
User avatar
GirlOnTheTrain
 
Posts: 487
Joined: Mon May 25, 2015 7:19 pm

Re: Subway Extension to Secaucus (Flushing #7 or L Canarsie)

Postby Jeff Smith » Tue May 09, 2017 2:30 pm

Laguardia discussion: viewtopic.php?f=68&t=158672
Next stop, Willoughby
~Jeff Smith (fka "Sarge") :: RAILROAD.NET Site Administrator
Jeff Smith
Site Admin
 
Posts: 7848
Joined: Tue Nov 07, 2006 9:28 am
Location: MP 67.2 Georgia Southern Railway

Re: Subway Extension to Secaucus (Flushing #7 or L Canarsie)

Postby rr503 » Tue May 09, 2017 4:33 pm

trainbrain wrote:Instead of the 7 line being extended into NJ, it should be extended further into Queens. It could split at it's current terminus with one branch going up to College Point and the other going toward the Whitestone Bridge. That line has enough frequency to support a split and it still maintains the same frequency on the current portion of the line.

Problem with that is the 7 is packed as it is. Even with CBTC, I don't see the MTA getting more than ~35tph out of the line, and in current conditions, that's *barely* enough to handle the existing stations. To serve whitestone, a new line across maybe Northern Boulevard would have to be built. But that is a l o n g way off.
rr503
 
Posts: 604
Joined: Sat May 02, 2015 4:13 pm
Location: North by Northwest

Re: Subway Extension to Secaucus (Flushing #7 or L Canarsie)

Postby Greg Moore » Wed May 10, 2017 5:22 pm

Again goes to my whole belief that NYC could use a massive increase in its subway lines.

Something to perhaps run "semi-parallel" to the 7. Say split at Hunter's Point and curve up and to the north like the 7.
Check out QuiCR, Quick, Crowdsourced Responses for businesses.
Greg Moore
 
Posts: 5175
Joined: Sat Mar 13, 2004 12:15 am
Location: IT Consultant

Re: Subway Extension to Secaucus (Flushing #7 or L Canarsie)

Postby trainbrain » Thu May 11, 2017 7:30 pm

Keep in mind that many people from Eastern Queens do end up on the subway at some point. Just after a lengthy bus ride.
trainbrain
 
Posts: 342
Joined: Sun May 12, 2013 7:11 pm

Re: Subway Extension to Secaucus (Flushing #7 or L Canarsie)

Postby GojiMet86 » Thu Mar 01, 2018 12:31 am

A (7) extension to New Jersey in the news again:

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/02/27/nyre ... ersey.html

A Subway Ride to New Jersey? It Could Happen, Officials Say
By PATRICK McGEEHANFEB. 27, 2018

The idea of connecting the No. 7 subway line to New Jersey may not be quite dead yet.
The Port Authority of New York and New Jersey is commissioning a long-term study of ways to expand the use of rapid transit across the Hudson River, and it expects to get some help from the Metropolitan Transportation Authority, which operates the subway.
The two authorities are teaming with New York City and New Jersey Transit to consider a wide range of options for increasing commuting capacity two decades down the road. This week, the Port Authority received several bids from firms seeking the contract to produce the study, said Rick Cotton, the agency’s executive director.
Mr. Cotton said in an interview on Tuesday that the notion of extending the No. 7 line — an idea that was briefly considered several years ago — was just one of many possibilities that would be analyzed. He said he had not discussed the feasibility of connecting the city’s subway system to New Jersey with any officials of the transportation authority, including its chairman, Joseph J. Lhota. Six years ago, Mr. Lhota said that a trans-Hudson subway extension was “not going to happen in anybody’s lifetime.”
A spokesman for the transportation authority, Jon Weinstein, declined to discuss the study. In a brief statement, he said, “We look forward to working with federal, state and local public sector partners and private parties to explore long-term options for trans-Hudson transportation.”
Though Mr. Cotton and Mr. Lhota are appointees of Gov. Andrew M. Cuomo, the study does not indicate that Mr. Cuomo supports any particular option, Mr. Cotton said. “The point is looking at all possible options,” he said.
Mr. Cotton was quick to add that the Port Authority was not reacting to recent actions by the Trump administration that cast doubt on the viability of the proposed Gateway rail tunnel under the Hudson. Mr. Cotton said he sees Gateway, which could cost as much as $30 billion, as the most important transportation infrastructure project in the country.
But even if Gateway is eventually built, doubling the number of passenger train tracks between New York City and points west, there still may be a need for additional transit capacity across the river by 2040, Mr. Cotton said.
The Regional Plan Association, which studies the region’s transportation network and how to improve it, published its fourth regional plan last year. It made dozens of recommendations, including adding a second bus terminal in Midtown under the Jacob K. Javits Convention Center and having commuter trains run from New Jersey all the way to Long Island. It also suggested a couple of possible new transit lines from Manhattan to New Jersey, but not an extension of the subway system, said Thomas K. Wright, the association’s president.
“Gateway does not by itself solve the trans-Hudson capacity issue, and I don’t think a new bus terminal does either.” Mr. Wright said. “Looking at other options is a good idea.”
The only rapid transit system crossing the Hudson now is the PATH train system that the Port Authority operates. But the PATH, which connects parts of Manhattan with Newark and other cities in northern New Jersey, has become overcrowded at rush hour, as has the bus terminal the authority operates in Midtown Manhattan.
The Port Authority expects to be able to add capacity to the PATH after it finishes installing an automatic-braking system on the trains and tracks. That technology, known as positive train control, would allow for more trains per hour because they could safely run closer together with less risk of collisions.
The Port Authority is planning to rebuild or replace the main bus terminal, which is more than 65 years old. But even with that additional bus capacity and the added train capacity that Gateway would provide, there may still be a shortage of seats for commuters, Mr. Cotton said.
“The point is that the current forecast of demand would exceed capacity even if you assumed that there was a replacement bus terminal and, potentially, expanded capacity for PATH,” he said.
Demand for ways to get to work in the city from New Jersey has risen steadily for several years and is forecast to keep climbing. In 2017, all of the Port Authority’s operations — including the PATH, the bus terminal, the airports and the shipping port — had record volumes.
User avatar
GojiMet86
 
Posts: 87
Joined: Tue Sep 03, 2013 9:04 pm

Re: Subway Extension to Secaucus (Flushing #7 or L Canarsie)

Postby MaRoFu » Sat Mar 03, 2018 7:31 pm

I don't think it is a very good idea to straight run it to Secaucus, you would miss a lot of potential service areas.
I would imagine the line running like this:

An additional station in Chelsea or somewhere nearby
Tunnel to Hoboken Terminal with a station there
Some intermediate stops in Jersey City, preferably one near Newport and in Historic Downtown
Run through the Bergen arches, with a stop at Journal Square
Take the line to Secaucus, with a provision for an additional station at Harmon meadows and/or the Meadowlands (could be helpful once the mall opens)

(entering pipe dream territory) Or, why even stop at secaucus at all? If possible, end it at journal square and wait until an extension as far as Newark can be done. After all, Amtrak does not stop at Secaucus, and some NJ Transit express trains don't either. And the L train has a lot of possibilities regarding extension, it could run via Jersey City and Bayonne to Staten Island (although this probably is already being covered by the light rail proposal)
Train systems ridden (excl. airport trains): Amtrak, CTA Loop, D.C. Metro, JR (Central, East, West), Keisei, M&Erie, NJ Transit (NLR & HBLR), NYC Subway, Osaka City Subway, PATH, Shizutetsu, TDR Monorail, Tokyo Metro, TTC Metro/Streetcar
MaRoFu
 
Posts: 53
Joined: Sat Dec 17, 2016 11:14 am
Location: New Jersey

Re: Subway Extension to Secaucus (Flushing #7 or L Canarsie)

Postby mtuandrew » Sat Mar 03, 2018 8:25 pm

MaRoFu wrote:(entering pipe dream territory) Or, why even stop at secaucus at all? If possible, end it at journal square and wait until an extension as far as Newark can be done. After all, Amtrak does not stop at Secaucus, and some NJ Transit express trains don't either. And the L train has a lot of possibilities regarding extension, it could run via Jersey City and Bayonne to Staten Island (although this probably is already being covered by the light rail proposal)

And then sell the entire L to the Port Authority, who can connect it into PATH and AirTrain JFK. /pipedream
User avatar
mtuandrew
 
Posts: 5111
Joined: Tue Feb 20, 2007 2:59 am
Location: the Manassas Gap Independent Line

Re: Subway Extension to Secaucus (Flushing #7 or L Canarsie)

Postby korbermeister » Sat Mar 10, 2018 6:33 pm

MaRoFu wrote:I don't think it is a very good idea to straight run it to Secaucus, you would miss a lot of potential service areas.
I would imagine the line running like this:

An additional station in Chelsea or somewhere nearby
Tunnel to Hoboken Terminal with a station there
Some intermediate stops in Jersey City, preferably one near Newport and in Historic Downtown
Run through the Bergen arches, with a stop at Journal Square
Take the line to Secaucus, with a provision for an additional station at Harmon meadows and/or the Meadowlands (could be helpful once the mall opens)

(entering pipe dream territory) Or, why even stop at secaucus at all? If possible, end it at journal square and wait until an extension as far as Newark can be done. After all, Amtrak does not stop at Secaucus, and some NJ Transit express trains don't either. And the L train has a lot of possibilities regarding extension, it could run via Jersey City and Bayonne to Staten Island (although this probably is already being covered by the light rail proposal)


I believe that the original plan was to indeed, run the L to Hoboken and then from there, use the existing tunnel through the Palisades to get to Secaucus. Also, one of the main reasons to go to Secaucus is so that commuter bus passengers can transfer there for a subway ride directly into midtown, thus relieving pressure on the need for a new PABT.
There's no need to triplicate service to Newport from Hoboken, what with the PATH and the HBLR already providing redundancy for those trips.
"God favors fools, drunkards, and the United States of America" Otto von Bismark, 1898
User avatar
korbermeister
 
Posts: 152
Joined: Thu Mar 11, 2004 7:42 pm
Location: New Brunswick

Previous

Return to NYC MTA Subway and Rail, PATH and SIRT

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests