Small Things The MTA Could Do to Improve Service
At noon on January 1st 2017, the first (and possibly only) stations of the Second Avenue Subway opened. The three-station spur is the remnant of a behemoth first proposed in 1929: six tracks carrying nearly 100 trains per hour along the full length of 2nd Ave, reaching its branches out into Queens, Brooklyn and the Bronx. Aside from being radically pared down the 2nd Avenue Subway is notable for another reason, it is one of the most expensive transit projects in the whole world. At a whopping $2.3 billion per mile of track it is only outclassed in cost by two other New York City rail projects, the 7 extension and the East Side Access. New York pays 5–10 times the international average for subway construction (around 500 million per mile) and 2½ times more than the second most expensive city in the world for new rail projects: London (which builds at $900 million to $1.3 billion USD per mile).
This has to do with a combination of factors, but is mainly due to New York’s continued use of the expensive and archaic design-bid-build system (at the insistence of construction unions), the MTA’s extremely overcomplicated and abused system of work rules for its union employees resulting in massive labor costs, the contractor system, requirements by the Americans with Disabilities Act for expensive elevators and escalators, and possibly the Mafia. Public works is one of the rare instances where the interests of management and labor align; private contractors and union workers both benefit if the cost and duration of infrastructure is increased.
However despite the great cost and corruption the 2nd Avenue Subway is sorely needed. Since the demotion of the privately run 2nd and 3rd elevated train lines, the East Side of Manhattan and the Central and Eastern Bronx have only been served by the Lexington Avenue Line (4,5,6 trains). For over a million people the green line is the only subway line within reach. Combined with the narrower cars of IRT-constructed subway lines (also known as A division, or all the subway lines with numbers for names instead of letters), this has lead to an unprecedented overcrowding crisis unimaginable 30 years ago. The 2nd Ave Subway is expected to remove 300,000 people from the Lexington Avenue Line, reducing crowding by 13%.
As the city continues to grow, overcrowding will get worse. Notably the 7 train and the Queens Blvd Line are both pushing their upper limits on capacity. Unfortunately the obscene expense of new subway lines is prohibitive. The State can barely manage to find funds for the next three stops of the 2nd Ave Subway (which will cost $3.6 billion per mile, before any cost overruns), let alone new lines in outer boroughs. Therefore more subtle and creative solutions are necessary, ones that improve access and efficiency within the system, as opposed to expanding it. Here are just a few small things the MTA could do to improve our subway system.
Junction Reconstructions
There are a series of minor construction projects that the MTA could undertake, all far smaller than the already small 2nd Ave Line, but all of which promise some improvement in service or movement. The first of these are three junction reconstructions. In rail there are two main types of junction (places where train lines split or come together), flying functions and level junctions. Level junctions are the simpler of the two, and typically involve trains crossing over each other’s tracks. The disadvantage of level junctions is the fact that trains need to stop in order to allow other trains to make their turn, limiting maximum capacity. The more expensive flying junction flips one set of tracks over another, allowing trains to make their turns unobstructed. Thankfully here in New York (unlike Chicago) few level junctions are still in use.
However there still is one straggler, a single level junction yet to be abandoned or replaced: the Myrtle Avenue Junction. This junction in Queens is where the M train (Myrtle Ave Line) splits off from the J/Z (Jamaica Line). This junction restricts the M to about 8 trains an hour, far lower than the usual 15 or more trains per hour for most lines. This reverberates through the whole system, decreasing the number of trains per hour on 6th ave and overcrowding Queens Blvd Line (which the M run on). Much of the M train will be shut down this year for the reconstruction of its viaduct (the Jamaica and Myrtle Aves Lines are amounts the oldest in the city). This provides the perfect opportunity to install a flying junction, allowing the M to field up to 15 trains per hour.
There are three more junctions in the subway that could see improved efficiency, even though they are flying junctions. The first two are the Rogers Ave Junction in Brooklyn and the 149th Street Junction in the Bronx. Both of these junctions are part of A division are are some of the oldest tracks in the system. To save on costs both were built with overly sharp turns, especially the infamous “S” curve that is part of the 149th Street Junction. Both junctions handle interactions between the important Broadway/7th Ave Line (1,2,3) and the Lexington Ave Line (4,5,6) and therefore affect a large part of the system. The junctions cap the capacity of the two lines, restrict the length of train car to 51 feet and reduce the speed of both lines. Rebuilding the two would improve service on both lines, allowing for greater frequency and possibly longer car.
The third junction is the DeKalb Junction and Station in Downtown Brooklyn, part of B Division (the trains with letters for names, equipped with wider and longer cars). The DeKalb junction was designed as the hub of the BMT (The Brooklyn-Manhattan Transit Corporation one of the two private companies that started the Subway, along with Interboro Rapid Transit Company)in Brooklyn. Six tracks converge on the junction, four too/from the Manhattan Bridge and two too/from Downtown Manhattan. These tracks converge in an awkward pattern, requiring complex signaling and capping capacity on five different lines in Brooklyn, which serve much of the southern half of the borough. Reconstructing the junction to be more similar to the more modern South Fourth Street Station (which carries even more trains) would both increase the number of trains able to pass through the station and allow all five lines to stop in the station (currently while five lines pass through the junction only three, the B,D and R, stop there, riders who want to switch to the N or the Q must change trains at the crowded and labyrinthian Barclays Center Station).
New Track Extensions
In addition to junctions, “tail tracks” are an important part of the Subway. These are tracks that extend beyond terminal stations, allowing trains to efficiently turn around. Tail tracks at Queens Plaza, one of the busiest in Queens, would allow the G train to terminate there, instead of at Court Square, an unnatural terminal that is neither as busy or centrally located as Queens Plaza. It would allow longer and more frequent G train access and would facilitate better Queens-Brooklyn travel.
Tail tracks would also be beneficial for the Astoria Line (N,W). The current terminal of the line was not designed as a terminal. Additionally there is no storage yard at the end of the Astoria Line, meaning trains need to travel all the way back to Brooklyn for storage, limiting the line’s capacity. A two block extension of the line, combined with a new rail yard on abandoned Con Edison land just to the north would greatly improve service.
New and Improved Stations
Free transfers are tunnels built between different subway stations. They save people money and improve efficiency, making movement through the system easier. There are two free transfers that the city could construct for a relatively small sum of money. The first is a connection between Queens Plaza and Queensboro Plaza. These two stations are among the busiest in the borough and are only a couple blocks away from each other. A free transfer between the two would improve connectivity in rapidly growing Long Island City. In fact the City wouldn’t even have to pay for the transfer. A private developer could be enticed to build it in exchange for zoning concessions (as detailed in this article from YIMBY). The nearby Court Square mega station came to fruition through similar means. Citi Bank, in exchange for a 13% FAR bonus for its tower (the big green one) in Long Island City, connected the Court Square’s three progenitor stations at no cost to the City.
Another free transfer the City could build is between the 63rd/Lexington and 59th/ Lexington stations. 59th Street is one of the most popular stations on the Lexington Ave Line and the 63rd Street station has doubled in importance since the opening of the 2nd Ave Line. There is currently a free “out of system” transfer between the two, but it is expensive for the MTA and open to abuse and requires crossing four busy streets. A four-block tunnel between the two would be far quicker and safer. It could be financed in part by building an underground mall (a la Tokyo) or cheapened by running the walkway alongside the Lexington Ave Line.
To round off the new construction would be a single new station. Currently there is no connection between the G (crosstown line) and the J,M,Z, despite the fact that the G passes directly under the Jamaica Line. This could be rectified by demolishing the Hewes and Lorimer Street stations of the Jamaica Line, and replacing them with a station at Union Ave, directly above the G train. Alternatively an underground tunnel could be constructed between one of the stations and the G train.
Service Changes
To cap this all off, a series of service changes would greatly serve commuters, in addition to the new G terminal and increase frequency mentioned above.
The first is a rerouting of the 3 train. The current structure of the 149th Street Junction in the Bronx restricts the 3 train to its current stunted terminal at 148th Street. An added benefit to the reconstruction of this line would be allowing the 3 train to be paired with the 4 along the Jerome Ave Line. This would double the train frequency to Woodlawn and would vastly improve service to the Western Bronx. Additionally it would take pressure off the 4 train and by extension the Lexington Ave Line. Finally a new line pairing (between the 3 and 4) would continue to improve flexibility in the system. The 145th Street and 148th Street stations would be abandoned, the tracks would be kept for access to the 148th Street yard.
Another service change would be the rerouting of the M train. The M train would be shifted to run with the F to 63rd Street and then to the Queens Blvd Line. The current route of the M, to the 5th ave 53rd Street station puts a hard cap on the capacity of the 8th Ave Line (A,C,E), allowing only three trains ½ trains on the line, which equals ¾ of full capacity. The increased frequency of the M due to the rebuilding of the Myrtle Ave Junctions would make only made this worse.
The M would be replaced at 53rd by a new “H” train, allowing the Blue line to reach full capacity. The H and the E would continue to the Queens Blvd Line as the E currently does. The rerouted M would serve the increasingly important 63rd Street stations (with the 2nd Ave Line completed and the new free transfer). After that the M and the F would continue (as the F does now) to the Queens Blvd Line. The M and the H would be the Queens Blvd Line’s local service, while the F and the E would remain the local service. This is a more balanced arrangement than the current E,F,M,R situation and would have a higher frequency (maybe 10 trains per hour).
This rearrangement would make it possible to remove the R train from the Queens Blvd Line. The current arrangement of the Broadway Line (N,Q,R,W trains) is inefficient. Three trains are forced through the 60th Street tunnel, which only has capacity for two trains. This means that the Broadway Line is only operating at ¾ capacity. It also means that the Astoria Line is only at ⅔ capacity and that the Queens Blvd Line is missing ⅓ of a train (combined with the current state of the M it also means that the Queens Blvd Line is operating at about ¾ capacity).
At full capacity, the E,F,H,M trains would cover the Queens Blvd Line and the R could be shifted north to service the 63rd Street/Lex station and continue with the Q up 2nd Ave. This will bring the station to full capacity (it has four tracks and can take four trains, but currently only has two, the Q and the F) and facilitate a rapid transfer between the Broadway Line trains headed to 2nd Ave (Q and now R as well) and the 6th Ave Line trains headed to the Queens Blvd Line (F and now M as well). This will allow both the Broadway Line and 2nd Ave Line to reach full capacity. The 2nd Ave subway in the current service pattern (just the Q) is only at ½ capacity.
In summary, the current NYC subway system could be greatly overhauled and improved with the following changes:
- Rebuild four junctions
- Create two sets of tail tracks (and one new train yard)
- Build two free transfer walkways and one new station
- Demolish two old stations (while abandoning two more)
- Reroute three trains (3,M,R) and create a new train, the H
These changes will effectively:
- Double the frequency of the M train
- Increase frequency of the 2,3,4,5 trains of the A division and the overall capacity of the Bronx and Eastern Brooklyn
- Increase frequency of the B,D,N,Q,R trains of B division and the overall capacity of Southern Brooklyn
- Allow longer cars on most numbered trains (1,2,3,4,5,6, but not the 7)
- Increase the frequency of the Queens Blvd, Broadway and 8th Ave Lines by 33%
- Increase the frequency of the Astoria Line by 50%
- Increase the frequency of the Jerome Ave and Second Avenue Line by 100%
- Reduce pressure on the Lexington Ave Line
- Allow more freedom and flexibility across the whole system
And the City and MTA could do all of this for potentially less than the cost of the first three stations of the new 2nd Avenue Line.
