Here's my take: don't minimize stops in the outer boroughs, but if you want to minimize stops in Manhattan, they should be replaced by streetcars: 5-block intervals is perfect for a streetcar, which has much higher capacity than a city bus and on dedicated lanes would travel much faster for very local travel. There's an intuitive hierarchy here: streetcars for travel within an area of a city, subways for travel between different parts of the city, rapid commuter services (like BART or Metro in California, the Elizabeth Line in London, and the RER in Paris) for traveling in and out of the city while minimizing transfers, and conventional commuter services like the LIRR for getting in and out at longer distances.
Exactly what I thought. Many low income and senior folks probably rely on many of those stops. However, one could say as a young able-bodied person that a lot of the stops in the upper Bronx might be redundant even if many disabled and senior people rely on those stops, but one also has to assess on the true accessibility of those Subway stops. All over the USA, I've noticed senior people with limited mobility tend to use the buses a lot more as a matter of accessibility. And I Iike your idea of a streetcar, it would work perfectly in many midtown and downtown areas.
Stop removals in the outer boroughs would not result in a lot of negative impacts when done correctly. A potential example is the Hewes-Lorimer one and closing Beverley Road on the Q.
I’d like to know where this streetcar would go. Here in Toronto the streetcars are crap. Higher capacity than a bus? For sure! But when it breaks down, a bus can be towed or literally driven around. You can’t do the same with a streetcar. Mind you Toronto is way bigger (land wise) than Manhattan and there’s still issues with traffic. A streetcar may work or may have worked in the past, they’re no longer viable.
@@SamAronow Maybe, would like to know where you get your data from. Assuming what you say is true, this doesn’t include the initial cost of adding infrastructure aka the rails for the streetcar and traffic lights/stops and whatever else is needed. I can’t begin to imagine the chaos it would do to close down entire streets for construction.
Always wanted to see Hewes/Lorimer removed on the JMZ and a new station built connecting with the G at Broadway. I think this would be a nice way to show NYers the benefits of station removal. You could also do this quickly with pre-fab concrete viaducts to also show how much quieter these can be and help push more potential new lines to consider elevated and therefore lower cost construction.
This would be a service improvement and create new connections that would benefit the area in general. Fully agreed. However, removing stations for the sake of it alone is A SERVICE CUT. I'M all for a UNION AVENUE STATION. Even the MTA knows of this proposal, but has yet to act on it.
@@alexthemtaandr211weatherfa2 I agree somewhat. I’m only saying so because of the connection to the Q56 and the B13 that could also be made at the Cypress Hills station which is a win win. It may be a little inconvenient for those who live along the current Fulton street tracks
You ask anyone who lives or works near a station people want to remove they'll emphatically disagree. I used to work on 17th Street and 7th. I was very grateful to have the 18th street 1 station (one often discussed for removal) After commuting 1:15-25 from Queens, I was grateful to only have a 1-2 minute walk from 18th vs the 7 minute one from 14th. Removing that station would have turned a 2:40 minute round trip commute to nearly 3 hours on a bad day. I had customers years later that lived on 11th ave on 17th and 18th, they appreciated it too. Saving a minute on an already fairly fast train while making thousands of people walk another 7-10 is silly, especially on a local line. The subway needs extensions, not retractions.
Not all retractions are bad. Nassau and Atlantic on the SIR were closed and replaced with ONE new station right in between. A potential beneficial station consolidation is Hewes Street and Lorimer Street on the J train. Despite the M being rerouted to 6th Avenue and seeing a 53% increase in ridership as a result of it, there’s still huge crowding over at Metropolitan/Lorimer on the Crosstown G train, which like other stations on the Crosstown Line has seen huge ridership growth, same with Flushing Avenue and Marcy Avenue on the Jamaica Line. Consolidating the Hewes And Lorimer stops will open up new travel opportunities for both Jamaica and Crosstown riders and ease congestion at Metropolitan/Lorimer. The dwindling number of riders who use the current stations at Hewes and Lorimer can still take the very short walk to the new Union Avenue station or utilize existing B46 bus service to nearby stations. It’s a win-win. On your point for an 18th Street station, the closure of that station is something I highly disagree with though it can be a long term plan if warranted.
@@TheRailLeaguer Hewes and Lorimer being consolidated into a new stop with a transfer opportunity is a good idea, especially on a route like the J which is quite a haul from Jamaica and not particularly quick either. In that case it does make sense especially since neither station gets big ridership. 18th and 7th though, isn't exactly an empty station. I'd say you see more people getting on and off there than say Franklin Street further down the line. It's a fair used station for a local stop in a neighborhood with a fair amount of housing nearby, and a preferred option for those around it versus 14th or 23rd which can be a bit more congested.
Besides buses are useless in midtown Manhattan except the crosstown lines and 5/Madison buses. If people want speed they can use express trains not so serious. Nobody cares about the M7, M20
Exactly 💯% right on that. The Pelham 6 line definitely needs to be extended to co op city mall barto Bronx The N W trains needs to be extended to LaGuardia airport. The Thrid Avenue Elevated line definitely needs to come back between Gun hill road Clearmount Webster Boston road Bronx Queens plaza connecting to the 7 N W or used the 10 trains to replace the 8 Thrid Avenue Elevated. The Flushing line definitely needs to be extended to Bayterrence and the 11 trains to 20th college point whitestone Queens.
Only stop removal i ever supported was the removal of Intervale 2/5 line. When it burned down, I felt like there was no point rebuilding it because Simpson St and Prospect were close by. The station was saved by the community though and rebuilt.
That’s why we have a 4 track express system over most routes. No stations should be closed. There are rare exceptions like Dean street that was finally closed on the prospect shuttle in the 90’s. I can’t think of many more like that that should go.
Not all lines have 4 tracks, that’s mainly what he wants to remove. Even with a local/express system, some stops are too close, given the density of NYC.
There’s actually a FEW stations that can go. The notable one is Hewes and Lorimer on the Jamaica Line. Replacing them with one new station on the same line would not only continue to serve area riders that use the current stations, but also allow for new transfer opportunities to be opened up to the Crosstown G line. It’s a win-win for everyone.
@@TheRailLeaguer Only one example Please give me more because stop removals on buses is one thing But to remove subway stations because it isn't as used as the one further down is downright ridiculous
@@ninofromkitchennightmares1497 That’s not really the plan as there are very few stations that can go. Aside from the glaringly obvious Hewes and Lorimer stations, there is the Beverley Road station on the Brighton Line. I do see Atlantic on the L not really closed but relocated one block south to Liberty Avenue to better stimulate development in the area to improve the situation there. Also helps that a bus route used to run through that area along the aforementioned street so this subway station can provide the catalyst to bring the service back in some form.
While it's not an option for most systems, I really do enjoy it when a city has the extra tracks to support express services that skip over small stations, while not entirely cutting off any small station.
A number of years ago they did stop removal on the Staten Island Rail they removed the rarely used Atlantic stop and the almost never used Nassau stop and then they added one in the middle called Arthur kills and it's been absolutely amazing
The platforms were dilapidated and they only keyed one door for both stations if I remember. It was either spend on 2 new stations or just rebuild completely for obvious reasons.
I don't think there should be stop removal. You mentioned in the video how the subway is meant to be faster than the bus and removing some stops will speed it up. I disagree because even a train stopping at all local stops normally is still much faster than what a bus can do with all the traffic.
I have to disagree on this the point is not 3 stops in 10 blocks that matters. The end goal is for that subway to pass through those stops as quick as possible. To get passengers from further distances in the shortest amount of time. Keep the middle one so ppl can walk to both sides.
I like having stations close together. If you're gonna make stations farther apart, then you need to make buses way more frequent if we have to take the bus to get to the train.
When it comes to station consolidation, this is something that should be done, and done right. However there are very few examples of this that could work. One notable one is Hewes and Lorimer on the Jamaica Line. An often talked about one, this new Union Avenue station plan would provide many other benefits as well alongside speeding up service. The notable one is a new direct transfer point to the G train, opening up new travel opportunities for North Brooklyn and easing congestion at Metropolitan Avenue. Existing riders can make the short walk to the new station, adding almost no time to their commutes. Beverley Road and Cortelyou Road stations on the Q could also work as well, given how there’s nothing much around the Beverley Road area while Cortelyou Road has a bus route plus local shops nearby. Again, existing Beverly Road riders would need to walk to Cortelyou in this case, but will see no additional travel time.
@@V3RGE0FD34TH Not really since Cortelyou Road is only a short block away from Beverley Roland serves more rides. However I’m looking to at least try to incorporate the entrances of Beverley Road into Cortelyou Road.
I live in Philadelphia where our subway (really an el who runs underground for a short period) literally stop every 2 blocks then skips 15 whole ass blocks while trolleys run "local" lol. It's weird.
@@Shinycelebi Thats a Common misconception but no the El has always been underground from 22nd St to 2nd St. What your confusing it for is the section from 22nd St to 46th St who use to be elevated until 1955 when they extended tunnel for both the El and Trolleys at the Request of Drexel Univ and UPenn. However because of City Hall's awkward position in the middle of Market St they never had fully elevated the line. If anything even while underground the El use to loop around the foundation of City Hall until a through tunnel was built in the 50s. The trolleys use part of the looping tacks today before turn off on their own loop at 13th St Station.
@Joseph 19th And 22nd St are served by trolley that you can transfer for free at both bracking stations. So no they dont NEED to add anything. There a local express partnership going on with El and trolleys.
Considering these stops: Beverly Road on the q, 20th Av both on the d and n, Ave P on the f train, chambers street on the j and z, 28th st in Manhattan, 53rd street and prospect avenue on the r, eliminating 71st street on the d line to create bay ridge parkway to transfer to the b4 directly
I can’t imagine 110th and Lex being closed because it’s close to the elementary school I went to as a kid. I’m not sure that would be a good idea. As for Zerega, I lived between Castle Hill and Zerega and yeah, I think that would be fine.
That station gets a decent amount of ridership I think it could stay. If you want to talk about stations on the 6 that could get removed. I would say E 143 St. And possibly Zerega.
They wouldn’t take zerega away because respectfully from westchester sq to castle hill is a long ass distance . If I live on zerega I got to walk towards the sq or CHill
@@anthonycameron2067 NO. JUST NO. Stop wasting money to do things which are doing little effect to make things better and only worsen the environment around stations. You’re not helping.
The bus argument stated early in the video is moot since busses are in mixed traffic. Imagine telling people on the b/d that their stop is gone and taking the bx1/2 or telling Jerome Ave riders to take the 32 or walk to your now closed stop....you just downgraded their experience for no real benefit since you're just moving trains quicker to the nearest choke point without addressing the issues for slow service which is the interlining and at-grade junctions. Busses should be feeders into the subway but not quite suitable to fill gaps between stations. Metros are made for start-stop operation due to grade separation! That said, Jamaica Ave definitely has a couple stations closely spaced that can be closed that would be a benefit to the line.
Let's not forget by forcing everybody to ride the bus it becomes overefficent You then crowd the next stop which inturn slows the train down more than it did before the stop was removed That's like removing Castle Hill Avenue and making everybody take the Bx4 to parkchester which is already crowded
Even tho I don’t support stop consolidating right now because I’m more in favor of using funding to expand service. Here are some stations that could be removed #1 train. 18 street (28 st is right by F.I.T so it can stay) and Franklin St #2 train 219 st & 225 st and replace it with a 222 St #6 143 St And Zerega Av Delta Train. 50 St. Because 55 st is by 13 Av which is a major shopping area F Bay Parkway G 21 St- Van Alst J Alabama Av, Cypress Hills Q Beverley-Cortelyou Rds will be consolidated into one station
Most of these are VERY bad choices, like Van Alst should not be removed under any circumstances due to the development near the area and Hunterspoint Av LIRR station. These are just changes to change stuff around for barely any reason other than “speed”
Can't agree with any of these, particularly the 18th Street on the 1 train. That station is HEAVILY used. 23rd St and 14th St have enough riders and don't need anymore.
I have an idea how about we actually reopen/build more exits in the stations. And also considering that the MTA is focusing on building new stations on lines like the 10 Av Station on the 7. I think it’s a better idea to add not remove stations.
When it comes to removing stations, these might come to mind: The 103rd and 110th Street stations on the 6 can be removed and replaced with a brand new station: 106th-107th Streets. It can help speed up service on the 6 line, but the only worry is that it might generate overcrowding, but only by a fraction, though. The Hewes and Lorimer Street stations on the J and M can be demolished and replaced with a brand new station at Union Av, so that passengers can transfer to the G without having to walk out-of-system to Broadway station. Like 106th-107th Streets station on the 6, it’ll also speed up service on the J and M. 18th Street on the 1? Close it. That station is as good as toast. If 18th Street on the 6 was closed for being too close to 14th Street-Union Square, 18th Street on the 1 should be closed as well since it’s close to 14th Street-7th Avenue. That’s pretty much all I can think of right now.
The old Chicago solution for el trains was to build a new station between two existing stations and close the old ones. Nowadays, one would have to balance off the expense against the savings, especially in time. The one I've heard most about is adding Union Avenue on the J and closing Hewes and Lorimer Streets, thus providing a connection to the G. There are other possible places for el consolidation, but the expense may not be worth it. Yes, I have considered a station, probably called Tiffany Street, between Intervale and SImpson. It might be more effective to simply close Simpson.
First of all the 8 Thrid Ave Elevated line shouldn't not have never been removed from the south Bronx Clearmount Webster Boston road Bronx because the 8 Thrid Ave Elevated line did not make to much noises and the elevated structures over the cross Bronx express highway did not cracked and did not fall over people in the south Bronx except for Manhattan elevated line. They definitely need to add more new iRT subway 🚇 lines.
In the ordinal IRT plan, there was a single station at Fox Street in The Bronx. I'm not sure why Intervale Avenue was added, except that it was high enough to allow a passage between the uptown and downtown platforms. So then why was Simpson Street built? It might be possible to extend the Simpson and Intervale platforms to meet and remove the outer ends of each one. The existing entrances could be retained, especially the elevator at Simpson.
At first I was in support of killing Intervale after the fire, but if you look at the geography and street grid it would really have hurt the people around that stop. A big opportunity was missed when the five island platforms on the J east of Broadway Junction were rebuilt around 1984. It was proposed to replace the three middle ones with two better spaced ones. But the commercial activity that formed around those stations would have been disrupted. As well, fighting the community opposition to any change just isn't worth the effort and political costs. Too bad because the J, of all lines, needed its run time reduced. I can think of no other location anywhere in the system today where the benefit would be worth the hassle of saving maybe one stop somewhere. Hopefully the bus stop spacings can be fully rationalized going forward.
Some stops can actually be merged. Especially the ones in lower Manhattan. I think a better idea for some of these would be to merge them and close the open parts of the platform while directing customers to the correct part of the platform. Two stations that could be merged are Canal st and Franklyn st on the 1 line. They can use the existing space to add capacity while at the same time reducing the number of stops.
While the removal of some subway stops makes sense (on my line, the Q, Beverly Rd could disappear and little would be lost. Neck Rd also makes no sense where it is and would be better served being moved down to Ave X) I would be looking a lot more closely at our busses. There are bus routes in the city that are quite long but still don't have a limited or select service. The B68 for instance has a stop petty much every avenue, which ends up meaning it runs at a crawl unless it's late night or Saturday. I think buses like this (such as the B4) should be stopping every other avenue at least, just as normal service. If we're just taking about a wish list however, I think that the city's super long/busy bus routes, particularly the ones that run regular limited service (like the B35 and the B44) should be LRTs/Trams with dedicated traffic priority. One can dream I suppose.
Initially seeing the title I was slightly in disagreement however I see your point especially in the A division in the lower Manhattan area stops are in close proximity to one another so removal of one or two stops like Wall Street on the 2 and 3 could potentially speed up travel time.
That's the point. Connectivity is the soul of New York. If New York did to our system what Chicago did to the CTA system...then stations would be placed a mile apart creating service gaps,increasing demands on the bus network and increasing dependence on buses. The subway stations on the IRT are made close because of the times they were built. That still holds true for today..which is why we have capacity overflow built in via LOCAL AND EXPRESS ROWS. The 7th Avenue line is a prime example of this The 8th Avenue subway is also a prime example of excellent planning. Stations are placed further apart, limited all local stations in lower Manhattan below 59th st.. This is a capacity filler,as the Express service is only relevant Above 59th st..skipping 7 stations in residential areas the local serve. well. Any station removal with produce totally unnecessary hardships that would affect the neighborhood it served. A repeat of the damage Chicago suffering from from is unacceptable in NYC and should be promptly rejected as foolish. Even if the so called "speeding up service " nonsense is applied, that alone is the reason why EXPRESS service makes sense, via center tracks on 3 track elevated lines,and 4 track subways. The Originator of the video has good intentions, but seems to lack true understanding of How the rail system works,what it's purpose really is, and how it affect the neighborhoods it passes through. As a native New Yorker,any cut in service is a SERVICE CUT,and that never works out well for customers in the Short or long run. I hope if this young man is looking for credibility, or wants to be taken seriously..he needs to invest time in research. Riding patterns, service levels. The history of the MTA reduction of service leading to route eliminations due to various ridiculous reasons. We need service revisions, improvements and additions...not reductions in the Name of Speeding Up service.
@@believer5497 Well station consolidations can be good if done right. The SIR did it and one potential case study is Hewes Street and Lorimer Street, something often discussed.
@@TheRailLeaguer The SIR did it because the STATIONS were too small. Also, the densities of Lower Staten Island are nowhere to be compared to The Financial District. Me and others only support the Union St. thing because it goes to the G directly. If this wasn’t the case I’d be more neutral.
Beverly rd and Cortelyou rd on the Q are super close, but it might be because the infrastructure only allowed narrow platforms, and both get crowded easily, although I don’t think any other subway stations are as close together as those 2
Similar issue on the L line. He spoke before on his least used station series about Atlantic Avenue. That can go, and instead of of a Sutter Avenue stop, it should move up to Pitkin.
They tried to close that a while back, but there was community opposition. Not to mention that it is a closer stop to the Bx6 161st/163rd Street route that Prospect Avenue. However if they were to do that, they should combine Prospect Avenue and Intervale Avenue into a single station at 163rd Street and move the Jackson Avenue station to 156th Street. I’m not sure how a new station at St. Ann’s Avenue would work, but it should be added over there if possible.
Neck Road and Courtelou/Beverly. Just skip the stops on weekdays. There are also bus stops that are a few feet away from each other. If you’re elderly or disabled, just use specialized bus services
Only 3 examples can work. Like 145th on the 3, the hewes station on J and Beverly on the Q. Otherwise not much in the case of the 1 just use the 2 for express service.
How about just like: more express service. One of the big pain points of living in NYC is how long it takes to get around... what if the A Train ran even more express? Or what if there were a train from Bronx to Brooklyn without stopping? I'm realizing these are kind of pipe-dreamy proposals but I think it's on-topic - we have some semi-redundant train lines, why don't we make some of them super express?
>station should be closed to increase effectiveness or something >shows 3 different instances where trains just chill for 30s in a station for no reason and also slows down and accelerate quite slowly ig, Americans could get together their basics first before ruining any last pieces of public transport they have left
I don’t think you got the point of the video at all. NYC’s Subway has tighter stop spacing than most modern metro systems, and that heavily impacts average speed (because we don’t use rubber tires like Paris, which has even tighter spacing). Trains on the NYC Subway crawl between stations at 25 MPH most times. In one instance, Beverly Rd and Cortelyou Rd, once the last car leaves Beverly Rd, the first car enters Cortelyou Rd, not even hitting 20 MPH.
No, it would be a terrible idea. The Chicago El has a problem where if you want to get on or off in your neighbourhood you have to walk or even drive to a stop because they took out so many stops.
If done correctly, then stop removals won’t be an issue. The Staten Island Railway removed two stops and replaced them with one a few years ago. In fact, another good candidate is glaringly obvious; Hewes Street and Lorimer Street on the Jamaica Line. Sandwiching a station on the nearby Crosstown Line (Broadway), replacing those two stations (which have seen decreasing usage) with one at the intersection with the Crosstown Line at nearby Union Avenue would allow for new travel opportunities to open up due to the new direct transfer passageway to the G train, which should ease crowding at Metropolitan Avenue on the G as well. This can all be done with almost no negative impacts to existing ridership at all Jamaica Line and Crosstown Line stations.
In London when the Bakerloo opened between Finchley Road and Baker St stopping at Swiss Cottage and St.Johns Wood and took over The Metropolitan Finchley Road to Stanmore... The Met became an Express calling at Wembley Park, Finchley Road and Baker St.. Bakerloo all the stops in between Ergo the Bakerloo became the local The Met the fast!
I think that both Hewes St and Lorimer St should both be removed, and a Broadway Stop will be added right in between where they were. This is so there could be an in system transfer to the (G) train
I don't think stop removal makes sense. Many city block are long - so a 5 city block walk is a long way for many. I honestly think revamping of routes and schedules to meet consumer needs is a greater need than taking away stations. Some examples are the 2 and 5. Why does the 5 need to go to Brooklyn at night - send it to south ferry - the 4 to Utica and the 3 to Franklin 24/7. Reroute the 2 back to New Lots 24/7. Put-in's from Livonia to Utica for the 5 for morning rush in Brooklyn. Reroute the J to Coney Island and the N to Whitehall Street - N riders could change at 34th street to the F for CI. The A to Lefferts and Rockaway Park and the C to Far Rockaway. Just a few thoughts thinking about ridership and hopefully a little common sense
Taking away 103rd st and 110th st will over crowd 116th . 103rd in particular sees very heavy usage in rush hours but not so much off peak. Also cuts off direct train access to schools in the area
Maybe if those two stops were consolidated into one at 106th Street with end entrances in proximity to the former stations then the crowding should not be an issue.
@@Blackhomeking12 Well that’s an underground situation so there’s that. Elevated is more easier, which is where the often talked about proposal of combining Hewes and Lorimer comes into play.
@@TheRailLeaguer crowding still exists your Just making it easier and quicker to overcrowd Because the only solution to that would be extending the platforms and extending the trains which will require alot more work and cause alot more problems than before
Remember they took down the Thrid Avenue Elevated line down also wich really really helped out the 2 5 4 6 lines and the BX ,15A Bx29 buses. Every sence they torn down the Thrid Avenue Elevated line they had the BX 55 buses to replace the 8 Thrid Avenue Elevated line and did not even mentioning about rebuilding the Thrid Avenue Elevated line back and now we have The BX 15 BX 41 buses running like crazy. They should of left the BX 55 buses alone And let the BX 55 buses be Limited service until the Third Ave Elevated line be rebuilt or inspections or something like that. If they tair something down put it back. Sop thinking about what the world needs think about what people need in life time. The ninth Ave Elevated line definitely needs to come back helping out the Jerome Ave 4 line. Send the 3 trains to the Bronx.
So, if 77th Street Station on the Lexington Avenue Line is still here, why should be removed to the 79th Street instead: No offense..or at least keep the 77th Street, but expanding exit location to 79th Street to connect with the M79SBS Bus Service? just a million dollar question of thought 🤔⚠️
I have two candidates: Hewes St/Lorimer St should be both removed and replaced by Union Ave station, with a transfer to the G. The other one is Aqueduct-N Conduit Avenue, which is very close to the Aqueduct Racetrack station. I would prefer a southbound platform on Aqueduct Racetrack.
The first one I agree with. It’s also the most talked about one among railfans. However for the Second one, I think that rather than closing Aquedyct Racetrack, it should be moved up a block to Linden Blvd, with an exit to Pitkin Avenue. Serving trains in both directions, this would allow for better serving of the areas around it (the current Aqueduct Racetrack station serves only the casino).
I think stations like Beverley Rd (Q) and 18th St (1) could be made rush hour/late night only stops! Beverley Rd has a historic station house built in 1907. Nice little relic of the past in a historic neighborhood.
18th Street shouldn’t be closed, but Beverley Road should, with its historic station house remaining as a local tourist attraction. After all, everyone can walk to Cortelyou Road.
I agree. Beverly road and Cortelyou are literally a block from each other. Also I think 28th street on the 6 line should go. You have 23rd and 33rd on both ends and that could save a couple minutes on the 6.
in Manhattan I have had many many experiences of taking the bus from East to West or West to East not working particularly good due to street traffic. (or President, or w/e) Isn't the point of underground is to be free (and reliable, I know) from horse carriages, ambulances and FDNY? etc. That 110st is a good example - you can walk to the next stop. How much MTA will save on shutting it down - idk, some I guess. But in outer regions you often can't walk. There is no connecting bus? Well that is bad, but its also a reason to keep that station open.
Station removals are very rare, but some have happened. Dean St. on the Franklin Ave. Shuttle was the most recent, I think, and that was several decades ago. I was thinking that Intervale Ave. would be a possible candidate, but yeah, I guess that SBS transfer makes it unlikely, as does the fact that it is the only station with a crossover (or crossunder, really) between 149th St.-GC and West Farms Square, and probably all the money that was spent rebuilding it after it was burned down. 18th St.-7th Ave. would probably have been removed by now if FIT (Fashion Institute of Technology) were not right there, but it is. Then there is the case of Beverley and Cortelyou Roads in Brooklyn, which are literally one block (albeit a fairly long one) apart. One of them could probably be removed, but which? I'd go with Beverley, but I'm really not too familiar with the neighborhood. I see no reason to even consider removing 110th/Lex, all the lines have 110th St. stops. But the Second Ave. subway plans have one stop at 106th St., rather than two at 103rd and 110th.
FIT is at 28th/7th, not at 18th. For the Cortelyou Road and Beverly Road consolidation, the latter should be the one to be removed. Also the Second Avenue Line has a 106th Street stop to connect with the M106 bus route for crosstown service.
@@TheRailLeaguer I argue for closing down Cypress, 143rd, Longwood, Whitlock, Elder, St. Lawrence, Zergea and Middletown Road setting walking distance and speed based on density maintaining the 0.8-1km rule, I think with higher stop spacing, peak-express service could be removed everywhere except for the Flushing Line since Peak express was never planned on any line except for Flushing as built in the dual contracts.
People whom want stop removals A) Don't take public transport B) Only want removal assuming it makes their commute faster C) As long it is not their stop being removed.
That’s not entirely true. A lot of people take public transit and many of that group have proposed consolidating two stops on the Jamaica Line into one to allow for better connections with the Crosstown G line.
@@WERNUTZ That’s not really true at all. The Staten Island Railway closed the Nassau and Atlantic stations and replaced them with one single Arthur Kill station. As a result, life goes on and not many people were screwed. This is also what I (and many others) are proposing for Hewes and Lorimer on the Jamaica Line. Two stations replaced with one nearby.
69st on the 7 Manhattan line should be removed b/c its close to 2 main junctions and ppl going to express trains often miss them b/c of that time used to stop at 69st
I agree. That only adds unnecessary congestion in that area. You have Woodside 61 with the LIRR connection running through southeastern Queens, and 74 Broadway connecting to the EFMR trains.
Stop removal only affects local trains on 7th and Lex Av, Express Trains are unaffected and passengers riding express trains still get there at the same speeds as now.
I would close 75 Avenue on the (E) & (F) from Midnight to 5AM 7 days per week due to no usage at all. This station see's or has very little usage, since it is situated between two busier express stations @ Union Turnpike Kew Gardens and Forest Hills 71 Avenue which see's a much higher level of service, which renders this station pretty much redundant. Trains usually just opens, and quickly closes their doors then proceeds in and out of this station rather quickly as well.
@@qjtvaddict Not a bad idea. But it CANNOT be done with the (R) because its already a disastrous long all local line from Bay Ridge 95 Street operating LOCAL all the way to Forest Hills 71 Ave with its 1 hour and 36 minutes running time. This (R) line for rancid, rarely, or rotten line to 179 Street was tried in 1989, and was quickly done away with in 1991, with (F) trains operating express stopping only at Union Turnpike, Parsons Blvd, and finally 179 Street. 75 Ave gets very little usage during the weekdays daytime hours, and even less during overnights and weekends, so it would be a wise decision to close it from 12AM to 5 AM daily as well. Whenever am (E) of (F) train stops there, nobody gets on or off the train, except people that are kicking-out their empty Heineken beer cans or Poland Spring empty water bottles onto its very quiet platforms. THIW's.
So if the tunnel in the Jamaica and Archer station is still open why didn’t they extend the trains beyond that instead they made Jamaica and Archer the last stop? 🤷🏾
I haven't been on the NY subway system in years (as in several not many) and mostly in Manhattan. Some of the lines do have stations that are very close to each other, but these lines also have reasonable express service alongside it and going from express to local isn't all that difficult. Because of the ability to express / local hop the pressure to make local cars faster is diminished.
I support this as well but I'll tell you one thing their number 1 trains especially between after 14th Street it can Skip and go to 23rd it doesn't need to pick up 18th Street 28th Street because all of those stations have exits of 19th Street which is close to 23rd and 28th Street which is closer to 30th Street and 27th exit all on 7th Avenue.
I see a lot of these comments supporting stop removal because trains will run faster. Stop removal isn't just about faster trains. The main reason the MTA eliminates stops is due to low ridership. Most of the stations you all are mentioning have high ridership (i.e. 18th Street on 1 train). The result of closing stations with good ridership numbers is overcrowding of surrounding stations. That will happen if you eliminate 18th St on the 1 or 28th St on the R. Also, we are in a period of possible declining ridership.The last thing you want to do is to make the subway LESS convenient by removing stops.
The best or only examples of stop consolidation in the city that can work would be Cleveland street and elderts lane on the J, Ave I on the F Cortelyou on the Q Van siclen on the 3/4 145th on the 3.
@@TheRailLeaguer See? Now,Ive always said that a station SHOULD BE BUILT ABOVE UNION AVENUE AND BROADWAY to Facilitate transfer connectivity between the Broadway El and the Crosstown line. It would open up greater opportunities to travelers in North Brooklyn that they are lacking. That would be a service Increase,not a service cut. I'm all for consolidation when it is BENEFICIAL TO THE RIDERS AND NEIGHBORHOOD. Random station closings is simply ridiculous on site.
@@believer5497 Well I don’t agree with random station closings either. The very few stations I picked usually involve better connectivity with a new station or a station with low ridership or low transfer activity or whatnot. Aside from Hewes and Lorimer, I also have just a few more in mind, with Atlantic Avenue, Bushwick-Aberdeen both closed and consolidated into Broadway Junction, and a new Liberty Avenue station to be built with a pedestrian tunnel to be built connecting Broadway Junction to be LIRR. The new Liberty Avenue station would allow for adjusted stop spacing and provide a better incentive for more improved bus service.
Here's my take: why not run skip stop services so that trains for each line stops once every three simple stop stations and at all interchange stations?
We did that before for the 1 train (the 1/9 skip stop), but that didn’t work out very well. Skip stop service also exists on the J/Z routes doing decently fine, but barely better than the E train via the Queens Blvd Line. Station consolidation is better in some aspects, but it’s to be done right. The obvious example is Hewes Street and Lorimer Street, consolidated into a single stop at Union Avenue. This would connect with the G train at Broadway and ease transfer congestion at Metropolitan Avenue.
@@TheRailLeaguer I'd argue for closing down Cypress, 143rd, Longwood, Whitlock, Elder, St. Lawrence, Zergea and Middletown Rd on the Pelham Line, maintaining the 0.8-1 km rule I set earlier, based on average walking distance and density.
Although not all stations are accessible, accessibility needs to be considered for any closure. It's really easy to say walk or take a bus to your new station, but it's not possible for everyone, and you're probably imagining a nice sunny day when you say it.
It should be easy for everyone but to plead everyone, there are few station consolidations that can work, aside from the glaringly obvious one at Hewes and Lorimer on the Jamaica Line.
@@TheRailLeaguer Other than that any other stop removal hurts more people Nobody's trip is slow if you keep zerega since it's still used and during the week only a few trains actually go throughbit
@@ninofromkitchennightmares1497 Nobody is proposing to remove Zerega Avenue or some of the stations. Rather only a few obvious stations can go or even relocated.
In my opinion, Zerega Ave on the (6) should not be removed. I used to live near the train station so I have a reason to disagree. I’ve seen the amount of people who get of at Zerega during rush hour. There are many people who live in that area. If you remove it, you will force lots of people to walk either to Castle Hill or Westchester Square. That could be a good walk for people who live farther away from Zerega. And before someone says something about the Bx4. That bus is very unreliable during rush hour when there is traffic further down Westchester Ave. And I know that nobody said that it should be removed, this is another reason why I think that it shouldn’t be removed.
The Pelham 6 line definitely needs to stay the way it is because millions and millions of people are used to the Pelham 6 line. The Pelham 6 line definitely needs to be extended to co op city mall. Lexington Avenue lines is definitely fine. The only thing that definitely needs to happen is the 8 Thrid Ave Elevated line running by itself again elevated in the south Bronx Tremont Webster Boston road Bronx. Under ground in Manhattan. The biggest problem is they had torn down the 8 Thrid Ave Elevated line down and it made it difficult for everyone. They can not do nothing with the 6 Pelham line at all because it definitely needs to stay put between Pelham Bay park and the and Brooklyn Bridge. They have to definitely find a new iRT lines that never was in service and put it in other areas in the Bronx where it's definitely needed
Love your videos, Mystic. Perhaps Willets Point can be partially eliminated except during Mets games or the US open. As someone who has experience with the London Underground I notice the stops outside central London are spaced much further apart than the NYC subway much more comparable to the LIRR or the A train between Rockaway Blvd and Beach 67th st which was a LIRR route at one point. We also need the Interboro Express which would help with travel between Brooklyn, Queens, and the Bronx. Also if London can expand the Jubilee line 10 stations in 6 years why can't we do something similar with the 2nd Ave subway? Phase one has been open for almost 6 years and no work has even started on phase 2?????
Mets-Willets Point is a park and ride when not in use as for Mets or US Open, and it's the only easy access to Flushing Meadows Park. That would not be a good station to put as an event only station. It gets modest use even when nothing is going on. It wouldn't be a bad idea to close it overnights though. Trains stopping there 12AM-5AM outside of events is an unnecessary stop that needlessly delays late night travelers.
Willets Point is needed for transit workers to the bus depot, and for better more direct connections to the LIRR. Phase 2 of the SAS is mostly done, it's Phase 3 that's gonna be the issue.
@@Shinycelebi Outside of events, the connection to the LIRR is moot since until Covid that station was event only. Also the Main Street Flushing LIRR station is even closer in proximity to the subway station, and has recently been renovated to be accessible as well. The use for transit workers at the Corona yards and the bus depot is certainly important though, I forgot about that.
What about, instead of stop removal, you implement a system where trains stop every two stations, with two different routes in the same line, like what the Santiago subway does in lines 2, 4 and 5?
There is one station I could think of that's close to one another. 28th Street station by the Broadway line where the R and W runs. It's proximately close to the 34th Street Station.
The discussion regarding the closure of subway stations is akin to Churches being closed for dwindling attendance and lack of support. What the last two years have taught us in both the cases of the subways in New York City (and other forms of Mass Transit in both the United States of America 🇺🇸 and Canada 🇨🇦 as well as the number of people attending church has not recovered to the point that they were before the pandemic hit. What is the solution I don't know!
Interesting video mate! I have a question for you: why do you consider stop removal necessary even when many parts of the subway have express and local service, alleviating some of the speed issues?
To be fair, no one is proposing widespread stop consolidation. Rather, there are few targeted areas for stop consolidation. The most prominent example is Hewes and Lorimer on the BMT Jamaica elevated structure along Broadway. The most common proposal is to replace these two stops, which have low ridership comparative to other neighboring stops, with a new one in between at Broadway and Union Avenue. This would speed local service and provide a new transfer point between the Crosstown Line and Jamaica Line with no negative impact to existing ridership at either station.
I just looked up 18 & 28 st ridership numbers and sorry Mystic those two stations aren’t going anywhere. Franklin St in the other hand might be able to go or it would of been better served if it was on Worth St instead.
Bro you should do a video of the Staten Island RR North Shore branch or extending Subway Service into Eastern Queens via existing ROW LIRR lines. Both are cheap and reasonable options to expand service futher in NYC. Great videos btw keep it up bro 🙏 - Fellow avid railfan
I'd like to see more examples of stop consolidation in outer boros. I personally think Queens is untouchable. I don't know enough about the Bronx. Only glaringly obvious consolidations in Brooklyn are the GJ/M connection and Beverley and Courtelyou Rds on the Brighton Line.
Beverley and Cortelyou will NOT be removed as together, they have as much ridership as Newkirk, and doing all that effort to change stuff (which would involve removing historical buildings) would amount to like, 30 seconds?
@@peskypigeonx Well maybe it should be one or the other, and quit frankly, Cortelyou Road is the one that’s more deserving to stay given that it has a bus route and several local businesses nearby.
@@TheRailLeaguer So read my message again. This saves like 30 seconds on a local route. This removal would cost millions of dollars. People are just inconvenienced. At least on an express train, the B and Q would even out crowding. A local station is not going to go well for the other.
@@peskypigeonx The current and potential ridership at the Beverly Road station is lower compared to Cortelyou Road, which serves a corridor ripe for improvements in bus service (a local route used to run there years ago). Negative impacts are mostly minimal. However there could be a compromise in which with some construction work and potentially some blood, sweat, and tears, the Cortelyou Road station would be lengthened to meet the Beverly Road platforms, still consolidating both while retaining access to both sides.
I would close down Intervale and Prospect and make one big station in the middle Intervale Av-163 St Station? Intervale and Simpson are too close and so is Intervale with Prospect
Simply closing down Intervale Avenue was proposed after the station burned down in 1988 but community opposition saved it and the station reopened four years later. It’s also why it’s the only station that didn’t get the turn of the century rehab work the rest of the elevated line did.
@@TheRailLeaguer Both Intervale and Prospect Avenue should be combined into one station at 161st/163rd Streets. It wouldn't disrupt connections with bus service. Jackson Avenue should be relocated further up to 156th Street. Also 143rd Street on the Pelham line doesn't really serve a dense area and lacks good bus connections so it's better to remove it. I also think Longwood, Whitlock, Zergea and Middletown Road are easily justifiable being removed as well the others aren't an immediate concern yet for stop removal on the Pelham line.
@@TheRailLeaguer I argue for closing down Cypress, 143rd, Longwood, Whitlock, Elder, St. Lawrence, Zergea and Middletown Road setting walking distance and speed based on density and eliminating peak direction express service and implementing stop consolidating on most stations for the elevated lines throughout NYC except for the Flushing Line since peak direction express service is planned since the dual contracts and that 3 track El serves a crucial part of western Queens.
The north end of the 28th platform on the r is basically a train length from then end of herald square, no reason to keep that station when people can easily go to 23 or herald
@@TheRailLeaguer Both Intervale and Prospect Avenue should be combined into one station at 161st/163rd Streets. It wouldn't disrupt connections with bus service. Jackson Avenue should be relocated further up to 156th Street. Also 143rd Street on the Pelham line doesn't really serve a dense area and lacks good bus connections so it's better to remove it. I also think Longwood, Whitlock, Zergea and Middletown Road are easily justifiable being removed as well the others aren't an immediate concern yet for stop removal on the Pelham line. But all in all I argue to remove Cypress, 143rd, Longwood, Whitlock, Elder, St Lawrence, Zergea and Middletown setting the 0.8-1km rule for density and how many people are willing to walk in NYC.
Why not a compromise? We already have trains like the A and D skipping some stops on their respective lines, so perhaps that “express and local” system could be expanded to more lines. Philadelphia also has “A” and “B” stops on their 69th-Frankford Line, meaning that trains only stop at stations that are designated to their letters. In short, an “A” train would skip a “B” stop, but make an “A” or “AB” stop.
@@TMC_BC But at least it would mean that no station has to necessarily close. Closing or merging stations may be the logical thing to do, but the amount of community activism and emotion that would get in the way of such affair would probably be enough to put a halt to any projects of such sort, as evidenced by the 3 train keeping both the 145th Street and 148th Street stations open as a result of such activism.
@@aycc-nbh7289 Skip-Stop is even worse though, you’re splitting capacity, and also having the effect of less precise scheduling, which is the exact opposite of what you want. It’s either express or local, not both.
@@TMC_BC But if stations will never be closed down or merged together if the community activism surrounding such events has been proven to be preventative, what would be the next-best option?
@@aycc-nbh7289 Better signaling, and higher acceleration rates have resulted in faster runtimes in the past. Trains were weakened in the 1990s due to several accidents caused by impaired T/Os
They should probably remove the Atlantic Av station on the L line… it’s too close to Broadway Junction and the Long Island Railroad is pretty close to Broadway Junction & Alabama Av…
But the thing is that the lirr station cuts the section in half. So if you on the alantic Ave side, you HAVE to walk under the underpass. It's a dingy ass ununderpass. It smells like piss and God forbid it'd nighttime.
@@TheStarsweareePerhaps we could move that station one block south to Liberty Avenue, which improves neighborhood connectivity without sacrificing connections to the LIRR. A bus route used to operate on Liberty Avenue so this could be a nice incentive to bring bus service back over there.
I’m all for removing Times Square. That station has too little people and few connections
😂
Lol
🤣
😂
?????????????????????????????????
Here's my take: don't minimize stops in the outer boroughs, but if you want to minimize stops in Manhattan, they should be replaced by streetcars: 5-block intervals is perfect for a streetcar, which has much higher capacity than a city bus and on dedicated lanes would travel much faster for very local travel. There's an intuitive hierarchy here: streetcars for travel within an area of a city, subways for travel between different parts of the city, rapid commuter services (like BART or Metro in California, the Elizabeth Line in London, and the RER in Paris) for traveling in and out of the city while minimizing transfers, and conventional commuter services like the LIRR for getting in and out at longer distances.
Exactly what I thought. Many low income and senior folks probably rely on many of those stops. However, one could say as a young able-bodied person that a lot of the stops in the upper Bronx might be redundant even if many disabled and senior people rely on those stops, but one also has to assess on the true accessibility of those Subway stops. All over the USA, I've noticed senior people with limited mobility tend to use the buses a lot more as a matter of accessibility. And I Iike your idea of a streetcar, it would work perfectly in many midtown and downtown areas.
Stop removals in the outer boroughs would not result in a lot of negative impacts when done correctly. A potential example is the Hewes-Lorimer one and closing Beverley Road on the Q.
I’d like to know where this streetcar would go. Here in Toronto the streetcars are crap. Higher capacity than a bus? For sure! But when it breaks down, a bus can be towed or literally driven around. You can’t do the same with a streetcar. Mind you Toronto is way bigger (land wise) than Manhattan and there’s still issues with traffic. A streetcar may work or may have worked in the past, they’re no longer viable.
@@es-zw3mg Streetcars have consistently proven significantly more cost-effective than BRT.
@@SamAronow Maybe, would like to know where you get your data from. Assuming what you say is true, this doesn’t include the initial cost of adding infrastructure aka the rails for the streetcar and traffic lights/stops and whatever else is needed. I can’t begin to imagine the chaos it would do to close down entire streets for construction.
Always wanted to see Hewes/Lorimer removed on the JMZ and a new station built connecting with the G at Broadway. I think this would be a nice way to show NYers the benefits of station removal.
You could also do this quickly with pre-fab concrete viaducts to also show how much quieter these can be and help push more potential new lines to consider elevated and therefore lower cost construction.
Get rid of crescent street and make the queens express track for z train and extended to ninth avenue on the d and use Coney Island yard
This would be a service improvement and create new connections that would benefit the area in general.
Fully agreed.
However, removing stations for the sake of it alone is A SERVICE CUT.
I'M all for a UNION AVENUE STATION.
Even the MTA knows of this proposal, but has yet to act on it.
@@alexthemtaandr211weatherfa2 I agree somewhat. I’m only saying so because of the connection to the Q56 and the B13 that could also be made at the Cypress Hills station which is a win win. It may be a little inconvenient for those who live along the current Fulton street tracks
I’ve always said this. Hewes is so close to broadway to not have at least a free transfer in the station
@@yanks3324 broadway g station has a free transfer to hews street j m station,because I think the z train will be dead
I remember when the 160s ran on the Q, the train wasn’t even out of Cortelyou Road before Beverly Road was announced.
@@blaazer9473 imma bet that an 8 car 143 can also fit.
You ask anyone who lives or works near a station people want to remove they'll emphatically disagree. I used to work on 17th Street and 7th. I was very grateful to have the 18th street 1 station (one often discussed for removal) After commuting 1:15-25 from Queens, I was grateful to only have a 1-2 minute walk from 18th vs the 7 minute one from 14th. Removing that station would have turned a 2:40 minute round trip commute to nearly 3 hours on a bad day.
I had customers years later that lived on 11th ave on 17th and 18th, they appreciated it too.
Saving a minute on an already fairly fast train while making thousands of people walk another 7-10 is silly, especially on a local line.
The subway needs extensions, not retractions.
Not all retractions are bad. Nassau and Atlantic on the SIR were closed and replaced with ONE new station right in between. A potential beneficial station consolidation is Hewes Street and Lorimer Street on the J train. Despite the M being rerouted to 6th Avenue and seeing a 53% increase in ridership as a result of it, there’s still huge crowding over at Metropolitan/Lorimer on the Crosstown G train, which like other stations on the Crosstown Line has seen huge ridership growth, same with Flushing Avenue and Marcy Avenue on the Jamaica Line. Consolidating the Hewes And Lorimer stops will open up new travel opportunities for both Jamaica and Crosstown riders and ease congestion at Metropolitan/Lorimer. The dwindling number of riders who use the current stations at Hewes and Lorimer can still take the very short walk to the new Union Avenue station or utilize existing B46 bus service to nearby stations. It’s a win-win.
On your point for an 18th Street station, the closure of that station is something I highly disagree with though it can be a long term plan if warranted.
@@TheRailLeaguer Hewes and Lorimer being consolidated into a new stop with a transfer opportunity is a good idea, especially on a route like the J which is quite a haul from Jamaica and not particularly quick either. In that case it does make sense especially since neither station gets big ridership.
18th and 7th though, isn't exactly an empty station. I'd say you see more people getting on and off there than say Franklin Street further down the line. It's a fair used station for a local stop in a neighborhood with a fair amount of housing nearby, and a preferred option for those around it versus 14th or 23rd which can be a bit more congested.
Besides buses are useless in midtown Manhattan except the crosstown lines and 5/Madison buses. If people want speed they can use express trains not so serious. Nobody cares about the M7, M20
Exactly 💯% right on that. The Pelham 6 line definitely needs to be extended to co op city mall barto Bronx The N W trains needs to be extended to LaGuardia airport. The Thrid Avenue Elevated line definitely needs to come back between Gun hill road Clearmount Webster Boston road Bronx Queens plaza connecting to the 7 N W or used the 10 trains to replace the 8 Thrid Avenue Elevated. The Flushing line definitely needs to be extended to Bayterrence and the 11 trains to 20th college point whitestone Queens.
The 3 trains needs to be extended to Burnside between New Lots Avenue Brooklyn.
Only stop removal i ever supported was the removal of Intervale 2/5 line. When it burned down, I felt like there was no point rebuilding it because Simpson St and Prospect were close by. The station was saved by the community though and rebuilt.
WHICH YEAR DID INTERVALE BURN DOWN!! AND I THOUGHT SIMPSON ST WAS THE ONE THAT BURNED DOWN!!
@@richiebee1984 Intervale burned down in 89 or 90. It wasn’t Simpson. You can tell Intervale looks more modern than Simpson, Prospect and Jackson.
@@ariesmichaelsayan4013 JUST LOOKED IT UP AND IT BURNED DOWN ON MARCH 16,1989 AND REOPENED ON APRIL 21,1992!!
@@richiebee1984 Why are you yelling?
That’s why we have a 4 track express system over most routes. No stations should be closed. There are rare exceptions like Dean street that was finally closed on the prospect shuttle in the 90’s. I can’t think of many more like that that should go.
Not all lines have 4 tracks, that’s mainly what he wants to remove. Even with a local/express system, some stops are too close, given the density of NYC.
There’s actually a FEW stations that can go. The notable one is Hewes and Lorimer on the Jamaica Line. Replacing them with one new station on the same line would not only continue to serve area riders that use the current stations, but also allow for new transfer opportunities to be opened up to the Crosstown G line. It’s a win-win for everyone.
@@TMC_BC very few examples
@@TheRailLeaguer Only one example
Please give me more because stop removals on buses is one thing
But to remove subway stations because it isn't as used as the one further down is downright ridiculous
@@ninofromkitchennightmares1497 That’s not really the plan as there are very few stations that can go. Aside from the glaringly obvious Hewes and Lorimer stations, there is the Beverley Road station on the Brighton Line. I do see Atlantic on the L not really closed but relocated one block south to Liberty Avenue to better stimulate development in the area to improve the situation there. Also helps that a bus route used to run through that area along the aforementioned street so this subway station can provide the catalyst to bring the service back in some form.
While it's not an option for most systems, I really do enjoy it when a city has the extra tracks to support express services that skip over small stations, while not entirely cutting off any small station.
A number of years ago they did stop removal on the Staten Island Rail they removed the rarely used Atlantic stop and the almost never used Nassau stop and then they added one in the middle called Arthur kills and it's been absolutely amazing
The platforms were dilapidated and they only keyed one door for both stations if I remember. It was either spend on 2 new stations or just rebuild completely for obvious reasons.
If they didn't have express service (unique to NYC) they wouldn't be able to get away with their stop spacing
Doesn't philly have express service?
@@blacklisted351 Yes it does, on the Broad Street Subway north of the city.
I don't think there should be stop removal. You mentioned in the video how the subway is meant to be faster than the bus and removing some stops will speed it up. I disagree because even a train stopping at all local stops normally is still much faster than what a bus can do with all the traffic.
I have to disagree on this the point is not 3 stops in 10 blocks that matters. The end goal is for that subway to pass through those stops as quick as possible. To get passengers from further distances in the shortest amount of time. Keep the middle one so ppl can walk to both sides.
@@Chris08TT by forgetting those who live in these inbetwren spots
I like having stations close together. If you're gonna make stations farther apart, then you need to make buses way more frequent if we have to take the bus to get to the train.
Well there are a few station consolidations won’t have a negative impact on existing ridership at the current stations.
And we all know how reliable bus service is.
adding more stops will slow trains down and encourage more cars. Or we can remove the subway and replace it with an underground highway
When it comes to station consolidation, this is something that should be done, and done right. However there are very few examples of this that could work. One notable one is Hewes and Lorimer on the Jamaica Line. An often talked about one, this new Union Avenue station plan would provide many other benefits as well alongside speeding up service. The notable one is a new direct transfer point to the G train, opening up new travel opportunities for North Brooklyn and easing congestion at Metropolitan Avenue. Existing riders can make the short walk to the new station, adding almost no time to their commutes.
Beverley Road and Cortelyou Road stations on the Q could also work as well, given how there’s nothing much around the Beverley Road area while Cortelyou Road has a bus route plus local shops nearby. Again, existing Beverly Road riders would need to walk to Cortelyou in this case, but will see no additional travel time.
I agree 100%
They could just close one of those stations, preferably Beverley Road and keep it as Cortelyou Road or Beverley-Cortelyou Roads
I used to live at Beverly it's a great station the removal of this disadvantages the elderly and disabled people
@@V3RGE0FD34TH Not really since Cortelyou Road is only a short block away from Beverley Roland serves more rides. However I’m looking to at least try to incorporate the entrances of Beverley Road into Cortelyou Road.
@@Moon_Dasher That’s what I was thinking for that too, though I’m open to a compromise.
If the Bx6 wasn’t on Intervale Ave, it could’ve easily been removed due to its proximity to Prospect Av and Simpson St
They tried to remove it after the station burned down, but it was saved by the community
I live in Philadelphia where our subway (really an el who runs underground for a short period) literally stop every 2 blocks then skips 15 whole ass blocks while trolleys run "local" lol. It's weird.
The MFL used to be completely elevated in the past before they put it underneath.
@@Shinycelebi The MFL was always underground in Center City. The portion from 30th St to 44th St is what was put underground in the 50s.
So you've never heard of the Broad Street Subway?
@@Shinycelebi Thats a Common misconception but no the El has always been underground from 22nd St to 2nd St. What your confusing it for is the section from 22nd St to 46th St who use to be elevated until 1955 when they extended tunnel for both the El and Trolleys at the Request of Drexel Univ and UPenn. However because of City Hall's awkward position in the middle of Market St they never had fully elevated the line. If anything even while underground the El use to loop around the foundation of City Hall until a through tunnel was built in the 50s. The trolleys use part of the looping tacks today before turn off on their own loop at 13th St Station.
@Joseph 19th And 22nd St are served by trolley that you can transfer for free at both bracking stations. So no they dont NEED to add anything. There a local express partnership going on with El and trolleys.
Beverley and Cortelyou roads on the Q line. It’s less then a full train length apart. Don’t know why those stations were made that way
You don't know why but there are full articles on why. Google?
@@Shinycelebi geez you don’t gotta be so pressed💀
These were built when buses didn’t exist.
Considering these stops: Beverly Road on the q, 20th Av both on the d and n, Ave P on the f train, chambers street on the j and z, 28th st in Manhattan, 53rd street and prospect avenue on the r, eliminating 71st street on the d line to create bay ridge parkway to transfer to the b4 directly
I can’t imagine 110th and Lex being closed because it’s close to the elementary school I went to as a kid. I’m not sure that would be a good idea. As for Zerega, I lived between Castle Hill and Zerega and yeah, I think that would be fine.
That station gets a decent amount of ridership I think it could stay.
If you want to talk about stations on the 6 that could get removed. I would say E 143 St. And possibly Zerega.
They wouldn’t take zerega away because respectfully from westchester sq to castle hill is a long ass distance . If I live on zerega I got to walk towards the sq or CHill
@@jeffrienunez4557 143 St should not be removed, it’s an ok distance away from the other stations, it’d be more of a waste to remove it
Remove 103rd street instead on lex ave local leave 110th
@@anthonycameron2067 NO. JUST NO. Stop wasting money to do things which are doing little effect to make things better and only worsen the environment around stations. You’re not helping.
The bus argument stated early in the video is moot since busses are in mixed traffic. Imagine telling people on the b/d that their stop is gone and taking the bx1/2 or telling Jerome Ave riders to take the 32 or walk to your now closed stop....you just downgraded their experience for no real benefit since you're just moving trains quicker to the nearest choke point without addressing the issues for slow service which is the interlining and at-grade junctions.
Busses should be feeders into the subway but not quite suitable to fill gaps between stations. Metros are made for start-stop operation due to grade separation!
That said, Jamaica Ave definitely has a couple stations closely spaced that can be closed that would be a benefit to the line.
Let's not forget by forcing everybody to ride the bus it becomes overefficent
You then crowd the next stop which inturn slows the train down more than it did before the stop was removed
That's like removing Castle Hill Avenue and making everybody take the Bx4 to parkchester which is already crowded
Even tho I don’t support stop consolidating right now because I’m more in favor of using funding to expand service. Here are some stations that could be removed
#1 train. 18 street (28 st is right by F.I.T so it can stay) and Franklin St
#2 train 219 st & 225 st and replace it with a 222 St
#6 143 St And Zerega Av
Delta Train. 50 St. Because 55 st is by 13 Av which is a major shopping area
F Bay Parkway
G 21 St- Van Alst
J Alabama Av, Cypress Hills
Q Beverley-Cortelyou Rds will be consolidated into one station
Most of these are VERY bad choices, like Van Alst should not be removed under any circumstances due to the development near the area and Hunterspoint Av LIRR station. These are just changes to change stuff around for barely any reason other than “speed”
Can't agree with any of these, particularly the 18th Street on the 1 train. That station is HEAVILY used. 23rd St and 14th St have enough riders and don't need anymore.
I have an idea how about we actually reopen/build more exits in the stations.
And also considering that the MTA is focusing on building new stations on lines like the 10 Av Station on the 7. I think it’s a better idea to add not remove stations.
That could be in done in tandem with a few stop consolidations. Hewes and Lorimer is one beneficial consolidation.
When it comes to removing stations, these might come to mind:
The 103rd and 110th Street stations on the 6 can be removed and replaced with a brand new station: 106th-107th Streets. It can help speed up service on the 6 line, but the only worry is that it might generate overcrowding, but only by a fraction, though.
The Hewes and Lorimer Street stations on the J and M can be demolished and replaced with a brand new station at Union Av, so that passengers can transfer to the G without having to walk out-of-system to Broadway station. Like 106th-107th Streets station on the 6, it’ll also speed up service on the J and M.
18th Street on the 1? Close it. That station is as good as toast. If 18th Street on the 6 was closed for being too close to 14th Street-Union Square, 18th Street on the 1 should be closed as well since it’s close to 14th Street-7th Avenue.
That’s pretty much all I can think of right now.
What about grand and graham on the L train
@@ikesspa5975Are they too close to each other? Should we replace them both with a brand new station?
@@VinceHere98Yes they are. They’re like 30-45 seconds apart via train.
Personally I could care less about the amount of stops, just come on time and more often, that’ll fix everything! 😂
Hey I live by 7th ave. And just so you know, lots of people use it to transfer between the A/C/E lines and the yellow lettered lines.
The old Chicago solution for el trains was to build a new station between two existing stations and close the old ones. Nowadays, one would have to balance off the expense against the savings, especially in time. The one I've heard most about is adding Union Avenue on the J and closing Hewes and Lorimer Streets, thus providing a connection to the G. There are other possible places for el consolidation, but the expense may not be worth it. Yes, I have considered a station, probably called Tiffany Street, between Intervale and SImpson. It might be more effective to simply close Simpson.
First of all the 8 Thrid Ave Elevated line shouldn't not have never been removed from the south Bronx Clearmount Webster Boston road Bronx because the 8 Thrid Ave Elevated line did not make to much noises and the elevated structures over the cross Bronx express highway did not cracked and did not fall over people in the south Bronx except for Manhattan elevated line. They definitely need to add more new iRT subway 🚇 lines.
In the ordinal IRT plan, there was a single station at Fox Street in The Bronx. I'm not sure why Intervale Avenue was added, except that it was high enough to allow a passage between the uptown and downtown platforms. So then why was Simpson Street built? It might be possible to extend the Simpson and Intervale platforms to meet and remove the outer ends of each one. The existing entrances could be retained, especially the elevator at Simpson.
At first I was in support of killing Intervale after the fire, but if you look at the geography and street grid it would really have hurt the people around that stop. A big opportunity was missed when the five island platforms on the J east of Broadway Junction were rebuilt around 1984. It was proposed to replace the three middle ones with two better spaced ones. But the commercial activity that formed around those stations would have been disrupted. As well, fighting the community opposition to any change just isn't worth the effort and political costs. Too bad because the J, of all lines, needed its run time reduced. I can think of no other location anywhere in the system today where the benefit would be worth the hassle of saving maybe one stop somewhere. Hopefully the bus stop spacings can be fully rationalized going forward.
Hewes and Lorimer on the J and M. Consolidate the stops into one at Union Avenue, with better connectivity with the G route.
I always wondered why 28th street was a stop along the 6th line. 23rd street had more usage being so close to Madison square park.
Try the bus and find out want speed use the 4 train
Some stops can actually be merged. Especially the ones in lower Manhattan. I think a better idea for some of these would be to merge them and close the open parts of the platform while directing customers to the correct part of the platform. Two stations that could be merged are Canal st and Franklyn st on the 1 line. They can use the existing space to add capacity while at the same time reducing the number of stops.
While the removal of some subway stops makes sense (on my line, the Q, Beverly Rd could disappear and little would be lost. Neck Rd also makes no sense where it is and would be better served being moved down to Ave X) I would be looking a lot more closely at our busses.
There are bus routes in the city that are quite long but still don't have a limited or select service. The B68 for instance has a stop petty much every avenue, which ends up meaning it runs at a crawl unless it's late night or Saturday. I think buses like this (such as the B4) should be stopping every other avenue at least, just as normal service.
If we're just taking about a wish list however, I think that the city's super long/busy bus routes, particularly the ones that run regular limited service (like the B35 and the B44) should be LRTs/Trams with dedicated traffic priority. One can dream I suppose.
Initially seeing the title I was slightly in disagreement however I see your point especially in the A division in the lower Manhattan area stops are in close proximity to one another so removal of one or two stops like Wall Street on the 2 and 3 could potentially speed up travel time.
That's the point.
Connectivity is the soul of New York.
If New York did to our system what Chicago did to the CTA system...then stations would be placed a mile apart creating service gaps,increasing demands on the bus network and increasing dependence on buses.
The subway stations on the IRT are made close because of the times they were built.
That still holds true for today..which is why we have capacity overflow built in via LOCAL AND EXPRESS ROWS.
The 7th Avenue line is a prime example of this
The 8th Avenue subway is also a prime example of excellent planning.
Stations are placed further apart, limited all local stations in lower Manhattan below 59th st..
This is a capacity filler,as the Express service is only relevant Above 59th st..skipping 7 stations in residential areas the local serve.
well.
Any station removal with produce totally unnecessary hardships that would affect the neighborhood it served.
A repeat of the damage Chicago suffering from from is unacceptable in NYC and should be promptly rejected as foolish.
Even if the so called "speeding up service " nonsense is applied, that alone is the reason why EXPRESS service makes sense, via center tracks on 3 track elevated lines,and 4 track subways.
The Originator of the video has good intentions, but seems to lack true understanding of How the rail system works,what it's purpose really is, and how it affect the neighborhoods it passes through.
As a native New Yorker,any cut in service is a SERVICE CUT,and that never works out well for customers in the Short or long run.
I hope if this young man is looking for credibility, or wants to be taken seriously..he needs to invest time in research.
Riding patterns, service levels.
The history of the MTA reduction of service leading to route eliminations due to various ridiculous reasons.
We need service revisions, improvements and additions...not reductions in the Name of Speeding Up service.
@@believer5497 Well station consolidations can be good if done right. The SIR did it and one potential case study is Hewes Street and Lorimer Street, something often discussed.
@@TheRailLeaguer The SIR did it because the STATIONS were too small. Also, the densities of Lower Staten Island are nowhere to be compared to The Financial District. Me and others only support the Union St. thing because it goes to the G directly. If this wasn’t the case I’d be more neutral.
@@peskypigeonx Well don’t stop at Union Avenue. There’s about a few more where station consolidations can be done.
@@TheRailLeaguer Yes there are, but in very limited circumstances, and which are probably in the single digits. Wall St. should not be removed.
Beverly rd and Cortelyou rd on the Q are super close, but it might be because the infrastructure only allowed narrow platforms, and both get crowded easily, although I don’t think any other subway stations are as close together as those 2
Those two are the closest station pairs in both directions in the entire system (Aqueduct Racetrack only serves Northboubd trains).
Similar issue on the L line. He spoke before on his least used station series about Atlantic Avenue. That can go, and instead of
of a Sutter Avenue stop, it should move up to Pitkin.
Neck Road and Ave U are VERY close, Close neck Road.
@@metsfansince-il6nm on The same B and Q line?
@@calvinkendrick851 yes, that the line, used to be called the Brighton line.
Intervale Av can definitely close. Prospect Avenue still has the connections to the Bx6/Bx6-SBS two blocks away as well.
Plus Hunts point ave is closer to Simpson street.
They tried to close that a while back, but there was community opposition. Not to mention that it is a closer stop to the Bx6 161st/163rd Street route that Prospect Avenue. However if they were to do that, they should combine Prospect Avenue and Intervale Avenue into a single station at 163rd Street and move the Jackson Avenue station to 156th Street. I’m not sure how a new station at St. Ann’s Avenue would work, but it should be added over there if possible.
@@TheStarswearee That’s on a separate line, so not really much of a comparison.
Neck Road and Courtelou/Beverly. Just skip the stops on weekdays.
There are also bus stops that are a few feet away from each other. If you’re elderly or disabled, just use specialized bus services
Only 3 examples can work. Like 145th on the 3, the hewes station on J and Beverly on the Q. Otherwise not much in the case of the 1 just use the 2 for express service.
Having too many stations sounds like a luxury only New York City would have.
Nope other cities have it globally
I think they should just close the entire subway down and make everyone commute by car.
How about just like: more express service. One of the big pain points of living in NYC is how long it takes to get around... what if the A Train ran even more express? Or what if there were a train from Bronx to Brooklyn without stopping? I'm realizing these are kind of pipe-dreamy proposals but I think it's on-topic - we have some semi-redundant train lines, why don't we make some of them super express?
Park Place is a good example of stop removal
They should remove the 2/3 express stop at 72nd. Let the 1 handle that station. 2/3 should go express from 96 to 42
Why?
In some cases, on busy streets bus stops can be one block apart
>station should be closed to increase effectiveness or something
>shows 3 different instances where trains just chill for 30s in a station for no reason and also slows down and accelerate quite slowly
ig, Americans could get together their basics first before ruining any last pieces of public transport they have left
I don’t think you got the point of the video at all. NYC’s Subway has tighter stop spacing than most modern metro systems, and that heavily impacts average speed (because we don’t use rubber tires like Paris, which has even tighter spacing). Trains on the NYC Subway crawl between stations at 25 MPH most times. In one instance, Beverly Rd and Cortelyou Rd, once the last car leaves Beverly Rd, the first car enters Cortelyou Rd, not even hitting 20 MPH.
How do you feel about Sedgwick ave being permanently sealed off?
No, it would be a terrible idea. The Chicago El has a problem where if you want to get on or off in your neighbourhood you have to walk or even drive to a stop because they took out so many stops.
If done correctly, then stop removals won’t be an issue. The Staten Island Railway removed two stops and replaced them with one a few years ago. In fact, another good candidate is glaringly obvious; Hewes Street and Lorimer Street on the Jamaica Line. Sandwiching a station on the nearby Crosstown Line (Broadway), replacing those two stations (which have seen decreasing usage) with one at the intersection with the Crosstown Line at nearby Union Avenue would allow for new travel opportunities to open up due to the new direct transfer passageway to the G train, which should ease crowding at Metropolitan Avenue on the G as well. This can all be done with almost no negative impacts to existing ridership at all Jamaica Line and Crosstown Line stations.
In London when the Bakerloo opened between Finchley Road and Baker St stopping at Swiss Cottage and St.Johns Wood and took over The Metropolitan Finchley Road to Stanmore...
The Met became an Express calling at Wembley Park, Finchley Road and Baker St..
Bakerloo all the stops in between
Ergo the Bakerloo became the local
The Met the fast!
Why is the Beverly road and cortelyou road stop so close on the q line. Aren’t those 2 stops the closest to eachother in the system?
Yes they are the closest stations to each other in the system.
I think that both Hewes St and Lorimer St should both be removed, and a Broadway Stop will be added right in between where they were. This is so there could be an in system transfer to the (G) train
I don't think stop removal makes sense. Many city block are long - so a 5 city block walk is a long way for many. I honestly think revamping of routes and schedules to meet consumer needs is a greater need than taking away stations. Some examples are the 2 and 5. Why does the 5 need to go to Brooklyn at night - send it to south ferry - the 4 to Utica and the 3 to Franklin 24/7. Reroute the 2 back to New Lots 24/7. Put-in's from Livonia to Utica for the 5 for morning rush in Brooklyn. Reroute the J to Coney Island and the N to Whitehall Street - N riders could change at 34th street to the F for CI. The A to Lefferts and Rockaway Park and the C to Far Rockaway. Just a few thoughts thinking about ridership and hopefully a little common sense
In a few places it makes sense, like the glaringly obvious Hewes Street and Lorimer Street one on the Jamaica Line.
You make good points sometimes bro but take away 110th on Lexington is crazy
Taking away 103rd st and 110th st will over crowd 116th . 103rd in particular sees very heavy usage in rush hours but not so much off peak. Also cuts off direct train access to schools in the area
Maybe if those two stops were consolidated into one at 106th Street with end entrances in proximity to the former stations then the crowding should not be an issue.
@@TheRailLeaguer That would be too costly as they would have to merge two stations and rebuiled new exits
@@Blackhomeking12 Well that’s an underground situation so there’s that. Elevated is more easier, which is where the often talked about proposal of combining Hewes and Lorimer comes into play.
@@TheRailLeaguer crowding still exists your Just making it easier and quicker to overcrowd
Because the only solution to that would be extending the platforms and extending the trains which will require alot more work and cause alot more problems than before
Remember they took down the Thrid Avenue Elevated line down also wich really really helped out the 2 5 4 6 lines and the BX ,15A Bx29 buses. Every sence they torn down the Thrid Avenue Elevated line they had the BX 55 buses to replace the 8 Thrid Avenue Elevated line and did not even mentioning about rebuilding the Thrid Avenue Elevated line back and now we have The BX 15 BX 41 buses running like crazy. They should of left the BX 55 buses alone And let the BX 55 buses be Limited service until the Third Ave Elevated line be rebuilt or inspections or something like that. If they tair something down put it back. Sop thinking about what the world needs think about what people need in life time. The ninth Ave Elevated line definitely needs to come back helping out the Jerome Ave 4 line. Send the 3 trains to the Bronx.
Intervale ave and Prospect ave station can be combined into one station .It would not disrupt connections to bus service,
So, if 77th Street Station on the Lexington Avenue Line is still here, why should be removed to the 79th Street instead: No offense..or at least keep the 77th Street, but expanding exit location to 79th Street to connect with the M79SBS Bus Service?
just a million dollar question of thought 🤔⚠️
I have two candidates: Hewes St/Lorimer St should be both removed and replaced by Union Ave station, with a transfer to the G. The other one is Aqueduct-N Conduit Avenue, which is very close to the Aqueduct Racetrack station. I would prefer a southbound platform on Aqueduct Racetrack.
The first one I agree with. It’s also the most talked about one among railfans.
However for the Second one, I think that rather than closing Aquedyct Racetrack, it should be moved up a block to Linden Blvd, with an exit to Pitkin Avenue. Serving trains in both directions, this would allow for better serving of the areas around it (the current Aqueduct Racetrack station serves only the casino).
I think stations like Beverley Rd (Q) and 18th St (1) could be made rush hour/late night only stops! Beverley Rd has a historic station house built in 1907. Nice little relic of the past in a historic neighborhood.
18th Street shouldn’t be closed, but Beverley Road should, with its historic station house remaining as a local tourist attraction. After all, everyone can walk to Cortelyou Road.
I agree. Beverly road and Cortelyou are literally a block from each other. Also I think 28th street on the 6 line should go. You have 23rd and 33rd on both ends and that could save a couple minutes on the 6.
The main problem is that buses in manhattan is an nightmare.
in Manhattan I have had many many experiences of taking the bus from East to West or West to East not working particularly good due to street traffic. (or President, or w/e) Isn't the point of underground is to be free (and reliable, I know) from horse carriages, ambulances and FDNY? etc. That 110st is a good example - you can walk to the next stop. How much MTA will save on shutting it down - idk, some I guess. But in outer regions you often can't walk. There is no connecting bus? Well that is bad, but its also a reason to keep that station open.
Only a few can be reasonably closed just not in Manhattan lol
Station removals are very rare, but some have happened. Dean St. on the Franklin Ave. Shuttle was the most recent, I think, and that was several decades ago. I was thinking that Intervale Ave. would be a possible candidate, but yeah, I guess that SBS transfer makes it unlikely, as does the fact that it is the only station with a crossover (or crossunder, really) between 149th St.-GC and West Farms Square, and probably all the money that was spent rebuilding it after it was burned down. 18th St.-7th Ave. would probably have been removed by now if FIT (Fashion Institute of Technology) were not right there, but it is. Then there is the case of Beverley and Cortelyou Roads in Brooklyn, which are literally one block (albeit a fairly long one) apart. One of them could probably be removed, but which? I'd go with Beverley, but I'm really not too familiar with the neighborhood. I see no reason to even consider removing 110th/Lex, all the lines have 110th St. stops. But the Second Ave. subway plans have one stop at 106th St., rather than two at 103rd and 110th.
FIT is at 28th/7th, not at 18th. For the Cortelyou Road and Beverly Road consolidation, the latter should be the one to be removed.
Also the Second Avenue Line has a 106th Street stop to connect with the M106 bus route for crosstown service.
@@TheRailLeaguer
I argue for closing down Cypress, 143rd, Longwood, Whitlock, Elder, St. Lawrence, Zergea and Middletown Road setting walking distance and speed based on density maintaining the 0.8-1km rule, I think with higher stop spacing, peak-express service could be removed everywhere except for the Flushing Line since Peak express was never planned on any line except for Flushing as built in the dual contracts.
People whom want stop removals A) Don't take public transport
B) Only want removal assuming it makes their commute faster
C) As long it is not their stop being removed.
That’s not entirely true. A lot of people take public transit and many of that group have proposed consolidating two stops on the Jamaica Line into one to allow for better connections with the Crosstown G line.
@@TheRailLeaguer all train stops have many people living near them closing any stops WILL screw someone over.
@@WERNUTZ That’s not really true at all. The Staten Island Railway closed the Nassau and Atlantic stations and replaced them with one single Arthur Kill station. As a result, life goes on and not many people were screwed. This is also what I (and many others) are proposing for Hewes and Lorimer on the Jamaica Line. Two stations replaced with one nearby.
69st on the 7 Manhattan line should be removed b/c its close to 2 main junctions and ppl going to express trains often miss them b/c of that time used to stop at 69st
I agree. That only adds unnecessary congestion in that area. You have Woodside 61 with the LIRR connection running through southeastern Queens, and 74 Broadway connecting to the EFMR trains.
What’s the fun of taking the 2 or 3 if you can’t skip a dozen 1 stops between WTC and mid town?
Stop removal only affects local trains on 7th and Lex Av, Express Trains are unaffected and passengers riding express trains still get there at the same speeds as now.
I would close 75 Avenue on the (E) & (F) from Midnight to 5AM 7 days per week due to no usage at all. This station see's or has very little usage, since it is situated between two busier express stations @ Union Turnpike Kew Gardens and Forest Hills 71 Avenue which see's a much higher level of service, which renders this station pretty much redundant. Trains usually just opens, and quickly closes their doors then proceeds in and out of this station rather quickly as well.
Better idea extend local trains to 179th and let all express trains skip 75th ave. Let only late night E trains stop there.
@@qjtvaddict Not a bad idea. But it CANNOT be done with the (R) because its already a disastrous long all local line from Bay Ridge 95 Street operating LOCAL all the way to Forest Hills 71 Ave with its 1 hour and 36 minutes running time. This (R) line for rancid, rarely, or rotten line to 179 Street was tried in 1989, and was quickly done away with in 1991, with (F) trains operating express stopping only at Union Turnpike, Parsons Blvd, and finally 179 Street. 75 Ave gets very little usage during the weekdays daytime hours, and even less during overnights and weekends, so it would be a wise decision to close it from 12AM to 5 AM daily as well. Whenever am (E) of (F) train stops there, nobody gets on or off the train, except people that are kicking-out their empty Heineken beer cans or Poland Spring empty water bottles onto its very quiet platforms. THIW's.
You probably shouldn’t do that.
So if the tunnel in the Jamaica and Archer station is still open why didn’t they extend the trains beyond that instead they made Jamaica and Archer the last stop? 🤷🏾
The line past Parsons/Archer was scrapped due to budget concerns when the line was being constructed.
In Vienna the a vague distance in strop spaceing is 400 meters.
whenever i hear the name worth st i think of that short on youtube called the subway shining
I haven't been on the NY subway system in years (as in several not many) and mostly in Manhattan. Some of the lines do have stations that are very close to each other, but these lines also have reasonable express service alongside it and going from express to local isn't all that difficult. Because of the ability to express / local hop the pressure to make local cars faster is diminished.
That still hasn’t stop some local stations from being closed. Examples: 18th Street and Worth Street on the Lex.
Take out 215th on the 1, that’s in the middle of nothing much and barely anyone uses it.
I support this as well but I'll tell you one thing their number 1 trains especially between after 14th Street it can Skip and go to 23rd it doesn't need to pick up 18th Street 28th Street because all of those stations have exits of 19th Street which is close to 23rd and 28th Street which is closer to 30th Street and 27th exit all on 7th Avenue.
I see a lot of these comments supporting stop removal because trains will run faster. Stop removal isn't just about faster trains. The main reason the MTA eliminates stops is due to low ridership. Most of the stations you all are mentioning have high ridership (i.e. 18th Street on 1 train). The result of closing stations with good ridership numbers is overcrowding of surrounding stations. That will happen if you eliminate 18th St on the 1 or 28th St on the R. Also, we are in a period of possible declining ridership.The last thing you want to do is to make the subway LESS convenient by removing stops.
The best or only examples of stop consolidation in the city that can work would be
Cleveland street and elderts lane on the J,
Ave I on the F
Cortelyou on the Q
Van siclen on the 3/4
145th on the 3.
I feel like there should not be a single station at 28th St.
Most definitely. 28th street isn’t necessary when you have 23rd street and 33rd street
Who Remember the 9 train back then raise your hands
I raised my hands for the 9 trains and the 8 Thrid Ave Elevated line aswell.
Okay.
Let's start with the station nearest to where You use the system.
So Hewes Street or Lorimer Street on the J and M, though this one really needs to be one new stations in between replacing the two.
@@TheRailLeaguer
See?
Now,Ive always said that a station SHOULD BE BUILT ABOVE UNION AVENUE AND BROADWAY to Facilitate transfer connectivity between the Broadway El and the Crosstown line.
It would open up greater opportunities to travelers in North Brooklyn that they are lacking.
That would be a service Increase,not a service cut.
I'm all for consolidation when it is BENEFICIAL TO THE RIDERS AND NEIGHBORHOOD.
Random station closings is simply ridiculous on site.
@@believer5497 Well I don’t agree with random station closings either. The very few stations I picked usually involve better connectivity with a new station or a station with low ridership or low transfer activity or whatnot. Aside from Hewes and Lorimer, I also have just a few more in mind, with Atlantic Avenue, Bushwick-Aberdeen both closed and consolidated into Broadway Junction, and a new Liberty Avenue station to be built with a pedestrian tunnel to be built connecting Broadway Junction to be LIRR. The new Liberty Avenue station would allow for adjusted stop spacing and provide a better incentive for more improved bus service.
Here's my take: why not run skip stop services so that trains for each line stops once every three simple stop stations and at all interchange stations?
We did that before for the 1 train (the 1/9 skip stop), but that didn’t work out very well. Skip stop service also exists on the J/Z routes doing decently fine, but barely better than the E train via the Queens Blvd Line.
Station consolidation is better in some aspects, but it’s to be done right. The obvious example is Hewes Street and Lorimer Street, consolidated into a single stop at Union Avenue. This would connect with the G train at Broadway and ease transfer congestion at Metropolitan Avenue.
@@R2626Train You serious?
@@R2626Train So you were being sarcastic?
@@TheRailLeaguer I'd argue for closing down Cypress, 143rd, Longwood, Whitlock, Elder, St. Lawrence, Zergea and Middletown Rd on the Pelham Line, maintaining the 0.8-1 km rule I set earlier, based on average walking distance and density.
18, 28 and Franklin on the 1 Have to go.
Honestly, I think they can get rid of Wall Street on the 4/5. It's so close to Fulton St, and not far at all from Bowling Green.
That station along with most station in Manhattan below 125th Street sees high ridership so not really recommended.
WALL STREET is heavily used and is in the middle of a dense financial and business scenter
The West End line could definitely get some stops removed
Ya, to many damn stations woth to little ridership.
There's not even enough ridership to justify running peak directional express trains on West End.
@@robotx9285 service is also infrequent
Although not all stations are accessible, accessibility needs to be considered for any closure. It's really easy to say walk or take a bus to your new station, but it's not possible for everyone, and you're probably imagining a nice sunny day when you say it.
It should be easy for everyone but to plead everyone, there are few station consolidations that can work, aside from the glaringly obvious one at Hewes and Lorimer on the Jamaica Line.
@@TheRailLeaguer Other than that any other stop removal hurts more people
Nobody's trip is slow if you keep zerega since it's still used and during the week only a few trains actually go throughbit
@@ninofromkitchennightmares1497 Nobody is proposing to remove Zerega Avenue or some of the stations. Rather only a few obvious stations can go or even relocated.
In my opinion, Zerega Ave on the (6) should not be removed. I used to live near the train station so I have a reason to disagree. I’ve seen the amount of people who get of at Zerega during rush hour. There are many people who live in that area. If you remove it, you will force lots of people to walk either to Castle Hill or Westchester Square. That could be a good walk for people who live farther away from Zerega. And before someone says something about the Bx4. That bus is very unreliable during rush hour when there is traffic further down Westchester Ave. And I know that nobody said that it should be removed, this is another reason why I think that it shouldn’t be removed.
The Pelham 6 line definitely needs to stay the way it is because millions and millions of people are used to the Pelham 6 line. The Pelham 6 line definitely needs to be extended to co op city mall. Lexington Avenue lines is definitely fine. The only thing that definitely needs to happen is the 8 Thrid Ave Elevated line running by itself again elevated in the south Bronx Tremont Webster Boston road Bronx. Under ground in Manhattan. The biggest problem is they had torn down the 8 Thrid Ave Elevated line down and it made it difficult for everyone. They can not do nothing with the 6 Pelham line at all because it definitely needs to stay put between Pelham Bay park and the and Brooklyn Bridge. They have to definitely find a new iRT lines that never was in service and put it in other areas in the Bronx where it's definitely needed
Love your videos, Mystic. Perhaps Willets Point can be partially eliminated except during Mets games or the US open.
As someone who has experience with the London Underground I notice the stops outside central London are spaced much further apart than the NYC subway much more comparable to the LIRR or the A train between Rockaway Blvd and Beach 67th st which was a LIRR route at one point.
We also need the Interboro Express which would help with travel between Brooklyn, Queens, and the Bronx.
Also if London can expand the Jubilee line 10 stations in 6 years why can't we do something similar with the 2nd Ave subway?
Phase one has been open for almost 6 years and no work has even started on phase 2?????
Mets-Willets Point is a park and ride when not in use as for Mets or US Open, and it's the only easy access to Flushing Meadows Park. That would not be a good station to put as an event only station. It gets modest use even when nothing is going on.
It wouldn't be a bad idea to close it overnights though. Trains stopping there 12AM-5AM outside of events is an unnecessary stop that needlessly delays late night travelers.
Willets Point is needed for transit workers to the bus depot, and for better more direct connections to the LIRR. Phase 2 of the SAS is mostly done, it's Phase 3 that's gonna be the issue.
@@Shinycelebi Outside of events, the connection to the LIRR is moot since until Covid that station was event only.
Also the Main Street Flushing LIRR station is even closer in proximity to the subway station, and has recently been renovated to be accessible as well.
The use for transit workers at the Corona yards and the bus depot is certainly important though, I forgot about that.
Cause the US is a corrupt American country and the American continent is a basket case
What about, instead of stop removal, you implement a system where trains stop every two stations, with two different routes in the same line, like what the Santiago subway does in lines 2, 4 and 5?
Skip-stop service is not viable in many cases, though there are stop removals that can be very beneficial.
Do you remember the "9" & "Z" trains? Those trains were skip-stop and it was a disaster.
There is one station I could think of that's close to one another. 28th Street station by the Broadway line where the R and W runs. It's proximately close to the 34th Street Station.
Shouldn't do that either. 28th Street is being redeveloped and ridership will increase in the near future. Too many riders already at 34th Street.
@@LadyJay114 I think what’s giving 28th street it’s ridership is that speakeasy bar in the station
The discussion regarding the closure of subway stations is akin to Churches being closed for dwindling attendance and lack of support. What the last two years have taught us in both the cases of the subways in New York City (and other forms of Mass Transit in both the United States of America 🇺🇸 and Canada 🇨🇦 as well as the number of people attending church has not recovered to the point that they were before the pandemic hit. What is the solution I don't know!
Some stations had seen ridership drops even before the pandemic.
Interesting video mate! I have a question for you: why do you consider stop removal necessary even when many parts of the subway have express and local service, alleviating some of the speed issues?
I think he is referring to the subways that run local.
Tell this to the people who use these stops and the businesses that rely on the foot traffic of people heading to and from these stops.
To be fair, no one is proposing widespread stop consolidation. Rather, there are few targeted areas for stop consolidation. The most prominent example is Hewes and Lorimer on the BMT Jamaica elevated structure along Broadway. The most common proposal is to replace these two stops, which have low ridership comparative to other neighboring stops, with a new one in between at Broadway and Union Avenue. This would speed local service and provide a new transfer point between the Crosstown Line and Jamaica Line with no negative impact to existing ridership at either station.
I just looked up 18 & 28 st ridership numbers and sorry Mystic those two stations aren’t going anywhere.
Franklin St in the other hand might be able to go or it would of been better served if it was on Worth St instead.
Bro you should do a video of the Staten Island RR North Shore branch or extending Subway Service into Eastern Queens via existing ROW LIRR lines. Both are cheap and reasonable options to expand service futher in NYC. Great videos btw keep it up bro 🙏
- Fellow avid railfan
Why not Harlem line to Staten island
I'd like to see more examples of stop consolidation in outer boros. I personally think Queens is untouchable. I don't know enough about the Bronx. Only glaringly obvious consolidations in Brooklyn are the GJ/M connection and Beverley and Courtelyou Rds on the Brighton Line.
Beverley and Cortelyou will NOT be removed as together, they have as much ridership as Newkirk, and doing all that effort to change stuff (which would involve removing historical buildings) would amount to like, 30 seconds?
I agree with both of those station consolidations, though for the Q it should be one or the other.
@@peskypigeonx Well maybe it should be one or the other, and quit frankly, Cortelyou Road is the one that’s more deserving to stay given that it has a bus route and several local businesses nearby.
@@TheRailLeaguer So read my message again. This saves like 30 seconds on a local route. This removal would cost millions of dollars. People are just inconvenienced. At least on an express train, the B and Q would even out crowding. A local station is not going to go well for the other.
@@peskypigeonx The current and potential ridership at the Beverly Road station is lower compared to Cortelyou Road, which serves a corridor ripe for improvements in bus service (a local route used to run there years ago). Negative impacts are mostly minimal.
However there could be a compromise in which with some construction work and potentially some blood, sweat, and tears, the Cortelyou Road station would be lengthened to meet the Beverly Road platforms, still consolidating both while retaining access to both sides.
i think the only 2 stops that are near and important are jamaica center and sutphin blvd
3:50
(Q) Bedford-Nostrand Ave-Coney Island, Via Crosstown/Culver Lcl
I would close down Intervale and Prospect and make one big station in the middle
Intervale Av-163 St Station? Intervale and Simpson are too close and so is Intervale with Prospect
Simply closing down Intervale Avenue was proposed after the station burned down in 1988 but community opposition saved it and the station reopened four years later. It’s also why it’s the only station that didn’t get the turn of the century rehab work the rest of the elevated line did.
@@TheRailLeaguer
Both Intervale and Prospect Avenue should be combined into one station at 161st/163rd Streets. It wouldn't disrupt connections with bus service. Jackson Avenue should be relocated further up to 156th Street.
Also 143rd Street on the Pelham line doesn't really serve a dense area and lacks good bus connections so it's better to remove it. I also think Longwood, Whitlock, Zergea and Middletown Road are easily justifiable being removed as well the others aren't an immediate concern yet for stop removal on the Pelham line.
Remember, it’s mass transit and needs to take people where they need to go including for the elderly and the disabled.
Well stop consolidations can do that too when done correctly (ex: potential Hewes and Lorimer on the Jamaica Line).
I never did understood why Zerega ave. train Station being so close to Castle Hill
Probably stop spacing concerns as between Castle Hill and Westchester Square no stop in between would make the stop spacing too wide.
@@TheRailLeaguer
I argue for closing down Cypress, 143rd, Longwood, Whitlock, Elder, St. Lawrence, Zergea and Middletown Road setting walking distance and speed based on density and eliminating peak direction express service and implementing stop consolidating on most stations for the elevated lines throughout NYC except for the Flushing Line since peak direction express service is planned since the dual contracts and that 3 track El serves a crucial part of western Queens.
The north end of the 28th platform on the r is basically a train length from then end of herald square, no reason to keep that station when people can easily go to 23 or herald
Zerega do have a bus connection and it’s the bx4 bus to Westchester square
That’s a parallel bus, not necessarily an intersecting one.
@@TheRailLeaguer
Both Intervale and Prospect Avenue should be combined into one station at 161st/163rd Streets. It wouldn't disrupt connections with bus service. Jackson Avenue should be relocated further up to 156th Street.
Also 143rd Street on the Pelham line doesn't really serve a dense area and lacks good bus connections so it's better to remove it. I also think Longwood, Whitlock, Zergea and Middletown Road are easily justifiable being removed as well the others aren't an immediate concern yet for stop removal on the Pelham line. But all in all I argue to remove Cypress, 143rd, Longwood, Whitlock, Elder, St Lawrence, Zergea and Middletown setting the 0.8-1km rule for density and how many people are willing to walk in NYC.
1:08 - Pride 1!
Can you make a video of the rethinknyc plan for penn station, sunnyside and port Morris?
Why not a compromise? We already have trains like the A and D skipping some stops on their respective lines, so perhaps that “express and local” system could be expanded to more lines. Philadelphia also has “A” and “B” stops on their 69th-Frankford Line, meaning that trains only stop at stations that are designated to their letters. In short, an “A” train would skip a “B” stop, but make an “A” or “AB” stop.
What your suggesting is skip-stop, and it has a multitude of problems.
@@TMC_BC But at least it would mean that no station has to necessarily close. Closing or merging stations may be the logical thing to do, but the amount of community activism and emotion that would get in the way of such affair would probably be enough to put a halt to any projects of such sort, as evidenced by the 3 train keeping both the 145th Street and 148th Street stations open as a result of such activism.
@@aycc-nbh7289 Skip-Stop is even worse though, you’re splitting capacity, and also having the effect of less precise scheduling, which is the exact opposite of what you want. It’s either express or local, not both.
@@TMC_BC But if stations will never be closed down or merged together if the community activism surrounding such events has been proven to be preventative, what would be the next-best option?
@@aycc-nbh7289 Better signaling, and higher acceleration rates have resulted in faster runtimes in the past. Trains were weakened in the 1990s due to several accidents caused by impaired T/Os
They should probably remove the Atlantic Av station on the L line… it’s too close to Broadway Junction and the Long Island Railroad is pretty close to Broadway Junction & Alabama Av…
But the thing is that the lirr station cuts the section in half. So if you on the alantic Ave side, you HAVE to walk under the underpass. It's a dingy ass ununderpass. It smells like piss and God forbid it'd nighttime.
@@TheStarsweareePerhaps we could move that station one block south to Liberty Avenue, which improves neighborhood connectivity without sacrificing connections to the LIRR. A bus route used to operate on Liberty Avenue so this could be a nice incentive to bring bus service back over there.
18th Street on the 1 line can go, but that’s the only one I can think of. Maybe 46th on the 7 but I don’t think so