I like this idea. This is "future proofing". Instead of waiting until neighborhoods are overrun with vehicular traffic and then building rapid transit. The transit line should be thought out, funding acquired, and constructed. The neighborhood will fill in later. Just looking at history bears this theory out. How many turn of the century pictures have we seen of elevated structures in this and other cities, with no sign of civilization is sight? Look at those same neighborhoods today.
I would love to see this. Maybe with one more stop between 42nd and 57th to service Hell's Kitchen, which is filled with a ton of residential buildings that have no subway access on 10th and 11th.
I can agree to the (LL) train going up 10th Avenue to 72nd Street. And maybe Transit can build that 9 Avenue - Port authority Bus Terminal Station for the (7) train can make a connection between the two lines at 41-42 Street.
@Mr.DeStylez Technically you are wrong as the L is a rather short line so extending it northward won’t have negative impacts for existing L train riders.
The (L) One of the best line (In my opinion) Does need to be extended. I Love the idea of the extension of the L train to 72nd st. The reason I love the (L) Is not only because the letter L start with my name, but it also has some cool tile art that you won’t see on any other line. Also I do want the (LL) Train to come back (In my opinion). That’s what I have to say about the L extension!
And also, it would be better to just have it there because no one knows what will happen in the future. What if the far west side of Manhattan gets more populated, and there is no subway over there? This also allows for more one seat rides.
I'd like to see this extension happen. I agree, not the number one prioroty at the moment but definitely worth considering for planning work in the next 10 years or so.
I would agree this isn't number 1 priority. Like 20 or so years. But it definitely should be done with all the residential growth on the West Side. Would also complement the Port Authority expansion being planned towards 10 Av.
This extension would be cool to see, but I agree it’s not a priority. I love how the local stations on the BMT Broadway line have unique art styles, maybe that could be incorporated into this extension?
@@amazing50000 What about building a new BMT Fulton Street Elevated Line, BMT 3rd Avenue Elevated Line, BMT LaGuardia Elevated Line, BMT Myrtle Avenue Elevated Line, BMT Metropolitan Avenue Elevated Line, IND Merrick Elevated Line, IND Penninsula Boulevard Elevated Line, IND Island Park Elevated Line, IND Webster Avenue Elevated Line, IND 3rd Avenue Elevated Line (Bronx), BMT Fort Hamilton Parkway Elevated Line, & IRT Flatlands Avenue Elevated Line?
I have an idea for a video: it’s about the G train. Since 2010, the G train has only ran between Court Square and Church Avenue. When it originally ran local on the Queens Boulevard Line from 71st-Continental to the odd terminus of Smith-9th Streets. My idea is that the G train should run to 71st-Continental again but as a limited rush hour service extension similar to how the W does in Brooklyn. In fact it is possible to implement this service without any construction, aside from the changing of station signage probably. The Court Square station tracks have no bumper blocks and the tracks continue on to Queens Plaza and onto the local route of the Queens Boulevard line, so this special rush hour G train extension is theoretically possible to implement.
Would be good to add extra service but the capacity is a little stretched already. The G, R, V of the past , idk how that worked but if the trains get extended from 4 cars, it would be cool
The should run from Forest Hills-71st Avenue to Coney Island-Surf Avenue, while the (G) should run from Court Square to Church Avenue. Only the should terminate at Forest Hills-71st Avenue, while the [M], [R], & [V] should terminate elsewhere. The should run from Stuyvesant Heights-Bainbridge Street to JFK Airport-TWA Hotel, while the (V) should run from 2nd Avenue to Jamaica-Atlantic Avenue. The should run from Graniteville-Richmond Avenue to Little Bay Park-Cross Island Parkway, while the (R) should run from Bay Ridge-95th Street to Willets Point-World's Fair Marina. The should run from Dyker Beach Park-86th Street to Bronx Park, while the (M) should run from Sunset Park-41st Street to College Point-5th Avenue. The [M] & [R] should be rerouted to the IND Northern Boulevard Line & IND College Point- Line, while the [G] & [V] should run local service on the IND Queens Boulevard Line. The [M] should also be brown again.
I absolutely love this idea the L train line extended to the upper west side 72st. this would make the far west of midtown, Hell’s Kitchen, Chelsea and the UWS more easier n fast to access. Hopefully the MTA consider this one day! The stations should have modern look while having maybe Art Deco style or anything that pops out with details design like our old architectures!
As a person who takes the L train every day I can tell you it would be blessing. I currently take the L to the last stop which is 8th avenue just to take the uptown A C or E to 34th street, I walk to 9th ave to go to work. Why not extend the L train.? You could have done the same thing on the other side. Expanding the L to flatlands Brooklyn. That is a big transit desert. Flatlands currently doesn't have a subway.
How about extend it to kings plaza. I always find it weird that the plaza dont have any trains nearby. If it does, i could see those flatlands nimbys spoiling those plans like they're team rocket.
@@tyshaw1732 I see your point there. There are a lot of good ideas out there. The question is how much and how long? It's never easy when it comes to the MTA. If we are serious enough to improve our subway system, we should be able to do it. Consider this we are constructing a 2nd ave line from Harlem to Hanover Square in the financial district. Not that the district needed it. It has enough. There are a lot transit deserts out there in the outer boroughs than Manhattan.
When planning such an extention. bellmouths on 14th street facing west towards Hoboken as well as bellmouths on 10th Ave facing south should be build. This would eventually allow you to build an entire 10th Ave subway as well as a subway below the Hudson. Optionally plan all station on 10th Ave with extremely wide platforms, so you could cut the platforms back to allow a 4 track subway 10thAve if there is demand.
Good idea, better than my plans for the 7 to WTC, I think we can still extend the M60 SBS on bus ways to WTC, we should build the QBX project aka Queens Bronx light rail connecter. The purpose of the project is to give the north Bronx a crosstown as well as a connection to queens giving the areas new transit and relieve congestion of the throggs neck bridge. I like the thumbnail. In 2030, the west side skyline will have eternity buildings 3:29
"It's been 84 years" edit: i've been a supporter of this proposal for years. While i normally have it go into queens via northern blvd when making fantasy maps, i could see this thing being sent to the bronx (maybe either covering the western bronx followed by crosstown gun hill rd service or a crosstown line along 161-163 st and Lafayette av)
Never thought of it but it sounds really interesting. Makes going to places like High Line and other places near the water on the west side very convenient. Walking from 8th to 10th or 11th Ave can be a drag at points. And that 1/2/3 transfer is a great bookend for the line. I swear, the MTA might need to hire you.
I lived in canaries for some time and I can honestly say I don't think I ever tool that L train into Manhattan I fell asleep one time on and seen I was underground I was like WTF 😅 😳 I barely went past Broadway junction on the L I'd say they need to extend the other way in Brooklyn toward east Flatbush
I think there was a proposal on extending the Brooklyn end along with other ones for the next 20 years. If they could send it down Flatlands for some miles that would be great
Great idea. However as long as it takes to build anything in NYC if implemented this could take as long as the 2nd AV subway that is not yet completed...hopefully construction would not take 50 years to complete...)-:
It's not a bad idea. I wouldn't mind this extension because it'll revitalize the west side. It'll also cut down on the long walk to 8th Ave to catch the train. I was staying on 56th and 9th for a bit and a train on 57 and 10th would have been so convenient.
@Mr.DeStylez And yet you have no issues with the Q train planning to be extended to 125th Street, which is almost the same distance as the L extension?
I mean this is even *more* fantasy, but extending the L to hoboken (and sending the 7 south with one stop at 14th street to Jersey City) makes sense to me. Obviously politics will never allow it, but it would unlock a ton of new ridership back in the reverse direction during rush hours. Would also solve the end of line space issues you highlight.
The should run from Alley Pond Park to Coney Island-Neptune Avenue, while the (7) should run from Flushing-Main Street to Prospect Park. It should run on the new IRT Greenwich Street Line, IRT New York Bay Line, IRT 12th Street Line (Brooklyn), IRT Nostrand Avenue Line, IRT Gravesend Neck Line, & IRT Cropsey Line.
Taking ideas from vanshnookenraggen, I would take this extension one step further and have the line turn back west at 57th Street, with stops at 57th Street - 7th & 8th Avenues (with a connection to the NQRW trains), 5th Avenue, and Lexington Avenue (with a connection to the 4 5 and 6 trains). Then it would run into Queens via a new East River tunnel and connect with the Queensboro Plaza and Queens Plaza stations on the 7 E M N Q And R trains. The extension would then run farther into Queens along Northern Blvd as a 2-track line, with provisions to expand to 4 tracks. There would be local stops at 68 Street, 80 Street, and 89 Street; an express stop at Junction Blvd where local tracks could terminate, and another stop at 108 Street. There would also be provisions to connect to the IND Crosstown line or phase 3 of the Second Avenue Subway if it ever gets built. After 108 Street, the line would run along the Whitestone Expressway with stops at College Point Blvd, 25 Avenue, 20 Avenue, and the final stop at 14 Avenue.
First and I agree because the L is to short it needs some construction on it my thought I think The L needs to go to new lots with the 3 or from 14 to Hoyt’s scermerhorn
I think it should go to 125 street and go east on it until meets Lexington Av line so the Second Avenue Subway can instead go to the Bronx, what are your thoughts about this
This extension is a great idea, and I definitely think it should be done. The only thing, though, is that the 10th Ave / 14th Street station should be on Washington Street instead of 10th Ave, and another station should be added at 50th Street.
I think that the design for the next L train stops in the future will look like the 2nd Avenue Line from the Q or the Hudson Yards station at the 7 train.
The [Q] shouldn't serve the BMT 2nd Avenue Line, as the [I], [T], [Y], {YT}, & {YF} should serve it. The [I] & [Y] should run express, while the [T], {YT}, & {YF} should run local.
When it comes to extending the L train, the idea I had was an extension in the opposite direction, specifically along the route of the former trolley line to Canarsie Pier. But this is good too.
Interesting call. Send it down to Kings Plaza via Ave M (under the creek) and Ave U terminating between Rite Aid and Walgreens with room for two train sets going towards Flatbush with stations at Remsen, E 80, E 71 and Mill Ave as terminus.
@Mr.DeStylez Or we can have both a L train extension to the Canarsie Pier and a 10th Avenue extension to 72nd Street. It will be beneficial for both boroughs and not create negative impacts to existing L train riders, especially since the extension of the Q train to 96th Street and eventually 125th Street, which combined is 3 miles (the same as the L extension to 72nd), isn’t negatively impacting Q train service.
@@TheRailLeaguer How about extending the (L) route westward via Avenue U to Kings Plaza after Seaview Avenue stations would be placed at Remsen Ave, E 80th St, E 71st St, Mill Ave, and Flatbush Ave as the terminal stop
Thoughts on it going into Jersey instead? Construction costs would be wild to send it up to 72nd. I'd even be OK if they had just done tail tracks when the rebuilt the line from Sandy
My issue is we need more expansions into Queens and (to a lesser extent) the Bronx more than Manhattan. As of early 2017 (per the Regional Plan Association), only 39% of Queens and 63% of the Bronx is within 1/2 a mile of a subway station compared to 91% of Manhattan. This has led to many stations in Queens (such as Flushing-Main Street) being insanely congested. We badly need the Queenslink, an extension of the A train east-west in the Bronx, a 7 train extension east, building a Northern Boulevard line to relieve congestion in Flushing, converting the Lower Montauk Branch to subway use (allowing a much quicker path from Jamaica to Long Island City), extending the Queens Boulevard Line further east close to the border, and more.
We need to reroute & extend the [M] route to The Bronx via the IND Northern Boulevard Line & IND College Point Line. There needs to be more Bronx-Queens connections like that.
I don't slow speeds at terminals delaying trains. Even if the next train during rush hour is 5 minutes or 3 minutes behind it. What may delay is when two trains are at the terminal and the third train has to wait to get in until that train's departure time. I've never heard a conductor say "attention passages we're being delayed because of a slow moving train into the terminal". I've heard them say "we're being delayed because of trains at the terminal waiting for departure". For that case I feel Terminals should be at least three tracks and two islands platforms wide, then that might alleviate some of the delays of trains trying to get into the terminal during rush hour. It works for the (7) at the Flushing Terminal.
I had the same exact observation. This should be a no brainer. The line would become much more useful to Manhattan and ease severe rush hour congestion. Present this formally!
Only thing since the river and West Side Hwy is really close on 10th &14th I was thinking the line can start at 9 Av. then turn on 23 St then continue on to tenth
I definitely agree on this L line extension (though the 10th Avenue/14 St stop might not be needed due to the already sharp curve) It would overall make commute/connections much more easier and faster. However, your brick design concept would make the stations too dark and dim. More Illuminated futuristic designs (ex: Elizabeth & Chengdu Metro) would be ideal
There should be an O train running to 14th and 8th Ave local from Canarsie and new express tracks built for the L which would run express on its current route.
if the O existed im hearing that they want The O to run from Astoria to coney island Via the 3 av line/ astoria express/ culver express thats what im hearing
This proposal may be more of a reality if a casino gets built in Hudson Yards, though I must say the Second Ave line should be the priority for Manhattan.
For the L extension to Spring Creek, you can put tail tracks for a possible extension into southeastern Queens. While it is better to reactivate the Rockaway Beach Branch it can add more options for Southeastern Queens Riders as most of it is a Transit Desert a terminal in Spring Creek, with rail tracks could allow the L to extend South Ozone Park or Further as it would provide South Queens Riders with a subway with the 3 also being extended to Gateway Center Mall
Good video! I had that similar thought a few years ago. You read my mind. When are you doing the video about extending the F Train to the Cross Island Pkwy Queens/Nassau Border?(UBS Arena)
Excellent video covering many details and a great upgrade to Westside if going to 72 street Extension to Canarsie pier would benefit people seeking a respite along Jamaica bay
And not to mention add some service coverage on Canarsie, as it’s two stations serve only the Northeast portion of the neighborhood. Both the 10th Avenue extension and the Canarsie extension can make L train operations better for all riders.
It needs a stop at 11ave 16th street heading north 11ave and 23rd street turning west and terminating at the Hoboken New Jersey Transit hub along with the 7 line extension to Hoboken as well.
Extending the L train north to 72nd St is very interesting. With the development of Hudson Yards that will give the MTA two crosstown trains the L & 7. The 72nd St @ 7th Ave stop is very narrow station, improvements may be needed!! There have been talks about extending the 7 train to New Jersey, how about the L train further north and/or the Q train @ 116th St crossing into Jersey, just a thought!!!!!! 6:01
Good idea. Considering the heavily industrial nature of the far west side generations ago it's surprising that train service was never built there to begin with but it's also possible that the workforce lived locally and didn't need it.
Important factual error in the video. The design of the 14th Street terminal itself and the bumper blocks do not inconvenience riders by slowing down service. The new South Ferry station, the terminal for the #1 train, has the same design and turns trains around very efficiently. The key is a high-speed switch in front of the station allowing trains to transition quickly into the available receiving track and slowing to a stop in the station. If the L's 14th St terminal is slower, it's because of the switch east of the station. Tail tracks beyond the terminal do help allow the train to enter the station a little faster, but their main value is in allowing the transit authority to store trains so they can be added to service at the following rush hour. However, your extension proposal is very imaginative.
The [L] & {LS} routes should run local on the BMT Canarsie Line, while the [S] should run express. There should be a lower level added. The should run from Harlem-125th Street to Broadway-Corporal Thomson Park, while the (S) should run from 18th Street to Brooklyn Army Terminal. The should run on the BMT West End Avenue Line, BMT 86th Street Line, & BMT 1st Avenue Line. The should run from Harlem-135th Street to Canarsie Pier, while the (L) should run from 34th Street-Hudson Yards to Canarsie-Rockaway Parkway.
While I agree expanding the L train uptown I think they should extend the 7 train to 14th Street between 10th and 11th Ave to connect with the L train. So you'll have plenty of transit in the area
@@SigmaRho2922 they would have to convert all of the trains to one specification and to run on the same power infrastructure. It's not going to happen. Plus it would kill path train and what would be the point of taking Amtrak then.
@@clays32 The 7 train extension into Secaucus Junction will not replace PATH, NJT, or AmTrak as they will all serve different ridership bases and catchment areas.
Bring the L up 10th Avenue and 50th Street, then onto Northern Blvd in Queens towards Flushing, terminating at Crocheron Avenue. 7 to Hoboken and Jersey City going to Newark via the CNJ Main (Now HBLR) and West Side Ave Branch.
You could also implement a regional rail service along the Port Washington Branch of the LIRR, along with opening infill stops at Elmhurst and Corona, to siphon off riders from the Flushing Line (Also required for any extension of Flushing eastward due to similar crowding issues).
I think wider spacing between subway stations in a city with population density as high as Manhattan doesn’t work. However, I would like to see an expansion of commuter rail to compliment subway systems. I was also thinking of extending the J line to connect with the L and then curve right to Columbus circle, making a 59th street crosstown.
Bad, large stop spacing on the Second Avenue Subway made some problems ALREADY, like missing a connection with the M79+. 15 blocks is insane and prohibitive of any bigger development between stations or serving riders effectively.
Maybe 8 blocks is good, why not extend the L even further to 125street and have it run east to Lexington Avenue that way the Second Avenue Subway can go into the Bronx, remember mystic transit’s video on the Throggs neck Subway, the second avenue Subway would go to a terminal near the Throggs Neck Bridge replacing his plans for the Throggs Neck Subway🚇please let me know your thoughts
@@broyofroyo1207 Update: bus-ferry ideas I was proposing 8 months should not be used on a literal transit solution. Sorry for being a bit mean back then, but the subway line there probably wouldn’t be worth it compared to other solutions. Today, I propose a Bx40/42 light rail solutions to connect riders more frequently to the 6, as well to other areas of the Bronx. This would culminate with a transit mall on Tremont.
@@peskypigeonx I forgive you for being a bit mean back then, your new idea is good 👍 and we can also do more transit improvements that are not high cost
I thought I was the only one who thought of a 10th Avenue extension of the Canarsie Subway, though my plan for that now is far different than before. For instance, the 10th Avenue Subway would run across Bergen County and Manhattan via Fort Lee Tunnel, 10th Avenue, and West Street, and would run alongside an extended 125th Street Subway. It would also include a completely reassigned M 10th Avenue Local that would run between 72nd Street-Broadway and Francis Lewis Boulevard via the 10th Avenue Subway and Myrtle Avenue Subway (a replacement of the old Myrtle Avenue Elevated). The line would also include the O and P 10th Avenue Express that would run between Fort Lee Terminal and Brighton Beach and Coney Island Terminal via the 10th Avenue Subway and extended Brighton Railway.
Am I the only one here who thinks most proposals to extend/build lines within Manhattan would be almost too secondary of a priority compared to building brand new services to more directly connect the outer boroughs to literally any other part of NYC BUT Manhattan? To compliment the upcoming IBX, perhaps the MTA could substantially rehab the: >Verrazzano Narrows >RFK/Triborough >Throgs Neck & Whitestone Bridges to ALL eventually handle LRT & buses on top of existing highway capacity? Be it “clip-on’s” being installed outside the existing highway lanes or under the existing bridge decks some way somehow. Such a thing would overwhelmingly likely take quite a few thousand INTRA-NYC & INTERBOROUGH car trips out of the equation for years to come while what very little highway capacity could be freed up more accordingly for regional & literal interstate traffic (much less commercial vehicles) instead of neighborhood-to-neighborhood/intRAborough and borough to borough. With said highways modernized overtime with said goal in mind- consolidating or even ELIMINATING plentiful redundant ramps within an immediate footprint. The less ramps within a 1-2 mile stretch, the less weaving inbetween, the less interruption for all traffic, the less potential for congestion. And said dedicated LRT/busways ON said suspension bridges isn’t even addressing the substantial potential to directly connect to SEVERAL existing subway lines within the Bronx, Brooklyn & Queens. To which would be almost a night and day difference for the entire city itself!
Probably, though a modest extension to 42nd Street as a Phase 1 of sorts could provide some increased capacity on the L route (the maximum capacity of the route on either end is 26 trains per hour due to the layout of both terminals. With an extension like that, not only are new areas served, but we could be operating 30 trains per hour to as far as Myrtle-Wyckoff).
i actually dont think its nessecary to put a 14 st 10 av stop because going north on 10 av from there you can imagine how big of a turn the L would make which would mean it would have to go snails pace at the turn causing even more delays also if ths L train is extended to harlem i propose stops at the following: 79 St, 92 St, 106 St, 116 St, 125 St, 135 St, 145 St, and terminating at 155 St, st nicolas av with free transfer to the C train
The Archer Avenue Line stations are not without their faults. Have never been able to figure out what they had in mind by making such a narrow stair going east at Sutphin Avenue. There are only two stairs, with the two escalators on the west having a somewhat wider stair in the middle. Was hoping the recent work going on at Archer-Sutphin would be to widen the stair (and get rid of the leg-breaker troughs on the side) but looks like it's just another elevator replacement.
I’d like to see the L be extended to American Dream in NJ. So far, the 7 seems to be the only line rumored to one day get an extension to NJ, possibly Secaucus Junction or Hoboken Terminal. However, I want to see the L be extended to NJ as well, and to the new American Dream mall. I imagine the extension will go from 14th Street-8th Avenue to 72nd Street like your proposal, but after that it’ll go west under the Hudson River, towards West New York, making a stop at Bergenline Avenue and 60th Street, near Miller Stadium, then go outside the tunnel to go to Tonnelle Avenue for a connection to the Hudson-Bergen Light Rail, after which it’ll travel over Cromakill Creek towards its next stop at I-95 (NJ Turnpike), and then finally it’ll go along Route 3 and make a stop at Paterson Plank Road to provide a bus connection to Secaucus Junction, before going underground again, under the Hackensack River, and terminating at American Dream. I believe an extension to American Dream will help boost the number of visitors to the struggling mall and even provide a fast way for sports fans to go from the city to the neighboring MetLife stadium without having to drive a car or take the bus. I know it sounds like a radical idea, but it can definitely work. The Mall could definitely benefit from a Subway extension, and that’s why I believe the L will be able to do just that. I imagine the station design will probably be similar to that of the 1999 London Underground Jubilee Line extension to Stratford, at least for the terminus at American Dream. For the stations in Manhattan, I’d say they would take some inspiration from the Amsterdam Metro, as well as some of the Elevated stations in NJ. 34th Street-Hudson Yards meanwhile should have a Jules Verne-ish steampunk-style design, similar to that of Arts et Meters station on Line 11 of the Paris Metro, given the neighborhood is in proximity to the Hudson River, hence the name. Station names for the proposed L extension: 10th Avenue-West 14th Street (Transfer to M14 SBS) 23rd Street (Transfer to M23 SBS) 34th Street-Hudson Yards (Transfer to 7 and M34/A SBS) 42nd Street (Transfer to 7, with passageway to 42nd Street-PABT on the A, C and E) 49th-50th Streets-Hell’s Kitchen 59th Street-John Jay College 65th Street-Lincoln Center (Transfer to 1) 72nd Street-Broadway (Transfer to 1, 2, and 3) Henry Hudson Parkway-Riverside Park (Transfer to M79 SBS) West New York-Bergenline Avenue Tonnelle Avenue (Connect to HBLR) Secaucus-NJ Turnpike Paterson Plank Road (Transfer to bus to Secaucus Junction) MetLife Stadium-American Dream (Connect to NJ Transit)
Honestly, this L train extension is not bad, but it needs to be the last subway extension to be built. In addition, Manhattan doesn't really have many transit deserts.
You still have the East Side with just Lexington Avenue over there, so the need for a full Second Avenue Subway still exists. Besides, nothing wrong with building more Manhattan projects as they benefit other boroughs as well. That connection at Bleecker Street between the Uptown 6 train and the IND Sixth Avenue Line benefits mainly Brooklyn riders, saving them a decent amount of commuting time.
I’d also like to mention that the reason bus routes on the west ride don’t get much ridership is because their frequencies are atrocious; the only ones that run frequently run crosstown. The development is there (Intrepid, south end of the High Line, Lincoln Sq, a bike path, etc.) but the MTA refuses to run good transit to them. I would absolutely support either an L train extension, or rerouting the 2 or 3 trains to Cristopher st on the PATH for improved 7th ave line headways.
Greetings Mystic. I would like to see the L train get extended, to head into New Jersey. There was talk about sending the 7 train to New Jersey, over the years, still on the drawing board of the MTA
That is also a sign stating that we need the V route back. Same goes for the H,K,V, and IRT 8 & 9 routes back. As we all know NYC, is well undeserved. Meaning that there are still places that really needs transit due to poor bus service and traffic. Walkers like myself doesn't fall into the category depending on the distance. Maybe we might get the chance to get these routes back. Or rerouted into new. However for this to be successful we need the environmental background checks and the collective funds that is a MUST to support these MTA projects. Of course subway crimes no matter the scale of it, will ultimately interfere with the plans of the MTA. And causing NYC to slowly dwindle or decrease overtime by moving into either another state or a whole other country.
I like extending the L 1 stop to tenth, but I would stretch the 7 down to meet it (along with adding the 42-10th stop) rather than taking this up as the L is somewhat long. It also avoids some excessive transfer duplication. A line that goes from 125 across and then down 10th would be nice but not sure it should be an extension to an existing line or a new one. NYC tends to hate branching so having the 7 go both ways it probably out.
The L route isn’t long as it’s a short 15-mile long route. Therefore extending the L train shouldn’t be an issue, but I’d rather end the extension at 72nd and Amsterdam, with provisions for service to New Jersey.
@Mr.DeStylez That’s is totally not true, as I ride the L and it’s not as bad as you think it is. Besides, Washington DC is extending its Silver Line out despite having no express service so why can’t the MTA extend the L train.
@@TheRailLeaguer Maybe the L just feels long due to being all local. In any case would much rather see the 7 turn downtown and the L extend to NJ is it gets extended more than a 10th or 11th stop, maintaining it's east-west(ish) nature.
@Mr.DeStylez Maybe you’re riding a different L train since the L train is alright now. Extending it up the West Side is not stupid and no, it won’t make your current trip much worse. In fact, your argument is actually wrong and stupid since the Second Avenue Subway extension of the Q train exists. The route as well as a few rush hour N trains have been extended 3 miles from 57th to 96th and 2nd and there haven’t been any delays related to that extension. So if the Q route is extended, so can the L route.
If Mini Metro taught me anything it taught me that this version of the L, going all the way up there when it already goes out to Canarsie, BK, would make the L way too long.
The new northern Blvd subway would be perfect for the canarsie line extension constructing from 8 avenue along tenth avenue and 57 or 79 st through the east river and northern Blvd to college point in Queens or past that point
As much as I would love another Manhattan-Queens connections, increased capacity can be solved with some deinterlining on the existing tunnels. Instead, what I recommend is having the L train continue up 10th Avenue to 72nd Street. From there it would then cross the Hudson River into New Jersey and go to the Meadowlands. Not only would this serve the new mall, but this would also allow for additional capacity for folks going to MetLife stadium alongside the existing New Jersey Transit connection. Thus it would alleviate congestion and avoid another MetLife stadium transportation meltdown.
@@TheRailLeaguerthis has nothing to do with deinterlining, I specifically said that the L train does have the potential to extend past beyond 8 avenue terminal and northern Blvd line could be the qualification for the L train extension and the L utilizes 20 tph thanks to CBTC and if including short term points at Willets Points and Atlantic Ave along with the upgrades, the L can get increase of 10 tph maximizing 30 tph between Willets Points and Atlantic Avenue while College Point and Canarsie can still maintain 20 tph
@@ianhardy9375 We do not need the L to enter Queens. Quite frankly you didn’t listen to me since my comment basically says that you can get more train service more effectively between Manhattan and Queens by deinterlining instead of wasting money on another Queens-Manhattan connection for the Canarsie Line. Also the L does not need to enter Queens.
@@TheRailLeaguer the Manhattan and Queens connection was basically a suggestion and I don't need to remind you that the northern Blvd line was recommended by the RPA and that line requires a additional tunnel to make it useable and providing a connection between Manhattan and Queens. The Queens Blvd line is doubtful because I don't know if the split east of 36 street is possible, diverting the service and adding another service on the crosstown is not going to happen since it's not prioritize and the G can hold its own by itself if the MTA do full length of cars and devise a way to restore it's service in Queens. The L train is the logical choice to do the Queens extension past 72nd street which is a good idea but this can go past beyond the terminal and it's similar to 7 not to mention the northern Blvd line parallels the existing 7 and the same goes for the west side and include the upgrades, two short term points to relay extra service and include transfers to the existing lines much like the second avenue subway, you can work around the network and between Willets Points and Atlantic avenue, you can give it an increase of 10 tph thus maximizing the capacity. The L train has that opportunity. I don't why you're commenting about this, I just suggested the idea so there should be no problem
@@TheRailLeaguer For Northern Blvd I'd propose a 2 track tunnel cutting East-West under 50th Street as a branch of the 10th Avenue Subway the Northern Blvd line would also have provisions to expand Northern with 4 tracks. After Court Square the 2 track branch would connect and would run alongside with the IND Crosstown Line stopping at a new lower level of Queens Plaza with a connection to Queens Blvd and 63rd St tunnel trains, next the line will stop at Broadway/Northern Blvd for a connection to QBL local trains past that station the line will form into 4 tracks. There would be local stops at 68th Street, 80th Street, 89th Street; an express stop at Junction Blvd and another stop at 108th Street then the line would turn northeast after Citified and run along the Whitestone Expwy with an express stop at College Point Blvd where the local tracks could terminate, other stops would be present at 25th Avenue, 20th Avenue and the final stop at 14th Avenue with provisions for a future extension into the Eastern Bronx.
This is cool. If the 7 train was to be extended past Flushing, which of the following do you think would fit best? 1. 20th Avenue and College Point Boulevard 2. Bell Boulevard in Bay Terrace 3. 225th Street and Northern Boulevard
Ideally the extension of the Flushing Line should operate via Roosevelt Avenue and Northern Blvd as far east as Bell Blvd. This would serve much of Northeast Queens and allow for the bus grid to be straightened out. This also helps to reduce congestion in Flushing since some of the bus routes currently going to Flushing can instead intercept the 7 train sooner, with some riders also opting to transfer to the Q12 bus on the same corridor to also reach Flushing.
@@TheRailLeaguer What about College Point/Whitestone and Bay Terrace as those resdental areas are major transit deserts plus having the 7 go to College Point or Hoarce Harding from what I'm hearing would have community opposition since those routings would traverse narrow residential streets and indirect routings as well there is a reason why Northern Blvd was chosen for the Flushing Line extension despite it paralleling the Port Washington Branch and even with regional rail suburban commuters are the majority beneficiaries this is nothing different from the Second Avenue Subway.
Personally, I'd extend the L similarly to stations at 14th St. park & Chelsea Waterside Park before plugging it into the 7 line at Hudson Yards. Alter platforms along the L so the whole 7&L routes from Flushing to Rockaway Park can take the 11 car A division trains the 7 currently uses and run the line as an extended '7' service providing an arc around Midtown linking the major North-South subway trunk lines and providing improved access to the west of Manhattan. This would also combine the 2 most extensive East-West routes across Manhattan island into one service and as all trains would now run through Manhatten you avoid the service frequency bottle necks that both lines are currently susceptible too with all their trains having to terminate and reverse so close to central Manhattan. With this new line still being grade separated from other subway lines, CBTC signalling and ATO style operations could mean that this line has the shortest headways and, ergo, highest capacity of any line on the system.
That would be too impractical since such a need for a service doesn’t exist. If anything, you’re better off keeping the Canarsie and Flushing Lines separate and extend those services separately (7 to NJ, L via 10th Avenue).
Just extend the l train to tenth avenue and the tail tracks going under 12 avenue and this will allow 25 trains per hour and extended the tail tracks at Canarsie to allow thirty trains per hour and that’s the current capacity of the seven train.
As a Canarsie kid who commuted every day to high school in Hells Kitchen (H.S of Graphic Communication Arts) I wish this extension was available years ago
Honestly that phase should go to 42nd Street so it could connect with the 7 train, meaning that the 10th Avenue station on that line would also be built.
@@ianrotheroe2540 34th/10th location is a block away from the 7, whereas the 42nd/10th stop will be right above (or below) the 7 train tracks. Also 42nd has a few more connections. About a block from the Port Authority Bus Terminal, and does get you closer to Hells Kitchen and Clinton Hill.
Extending the L as far as 10th Ave. should be a priority. On the other hand, the 7 train's tail tracks go all the way down to 25th St. already. Why not just build a 23rd St. station, with tail tracks down to 21st to serve West Chelsea.
Even if it that station would only serve West Chelsea, it would not serve the whole area effectively by itself. Also the new terminal for the 7 would also need tail tracks since there’s no room for more trains at Corona Yard. Also it would be better for the 7 to just turn west under the Hudson after 23rd and go to NJ.
I think that this extension should be done since when I want to go to 8th Ave it takes time for the train to get from 6th Ave to 8th Ave since it has to wait for a train to leave the station.
That's a great Idea 💡. But it would make the L Train 🚉 a much longer rider. And the MTA is'nt going look into send the L as far as to the Upper West Side In Manhattan But might Extend the L Train 🚉 to Chelsea Piers 23 -19 st 11 ave . Sir.
![ประสบการณ์ จ้าง Developer ที่ผมจะไม่มีวันลืม [ภาค1]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/bzivN4KDg-k/mqdefault.jpg)
I like this idea. This is "future proofing". Instead of waiting until neighborhoods are overrun with vehicular traffic and then building rapid transit. The transit line should be thought out, funding acquired, and constructed. The neighborhood will fill in later. Just looking at history bears this theory out. How many turn of the century pictures have we seen of elevated structures in this and other cities, with no sign of civilization is sight? Look at those same neighborhoods today.
The #7 extension to 34th Street was built this way. A TIF taxing structure was used to pay for the bonds.
I would love to see this. Maybe with one more stop between 42nd and 57th to service Hell's Kitchen, which is filled with a ton of residential buildings that have no subway access on 10th and 11th.
I was thinking the same thing. around 49-51 St
I can agree to the (LL) train going up 10th Avenue to 72nd Street. And maybe Transit can build that 9 Avenue - Port authority Bus Terminal Station for the (7) train can make a connection between the two lines at 41-42 Street.
A 50 St station would be really helpful. Also expanding the 57 St station to 57-59 sts to get folks coming from John Jay & Fordham
@Mr.DeStylez Technically you are wrong as the L is a rather short line so extending it northward won’t have negative impacts for existing L train riders.
@Mr.DeStylez How is my reply wrong when you’re the one who is wrong?
The (L) One of the best line (In my opinion) Does need to be extended. I Love the idea of the extension of the L train to 72nd st. The reason I love the (L) Is not only because the letter L start with my name, but it also has some cool tile art that you won’t see on any other line. Also I do want the (LL) Train to come back (In my opinion). That’s what I have to say about the L extension!
MY NAME STARTS WITH AN L TOO! I never have taken the L before but I will hopefully take it tomorrow. But the L does need an extension
If you say " i" there's no need to say in my opinion
I always wanted the (L) to be extended to go on either 9 Av OR 10 Av. Glad u made the proposal.
And also, it would be better to just have it there because no one knows what will happen in the future. What if the far west side of Manhattan gets more populated, and there is no subway over there? This also allows for more one seat rides.
@@jasminerosner5449 This has the same chance of the other end of the L train being extended to Canarsie Pier (actually did go there at one time).
I'd like to see this extension happen. I agree, not the number one prioroty at the moment but definitely worth considering for planning work in the next 10 years or so.
Maybe
I would agree this isn't number 1 priority. Like 20 or so years. But it definitely should be done with all the residential growth on the West Side. Would also complement the Port Authority expansion being planned towards 10 Av.
@@bellairefondren7389 yeah
@Mr.DeStylez waste of money
This extension would be cool to see, but I agree it’s not a priority. I love how the local stations on the BMT Broadway line have unique art styles, maybe that could be incorporated into this extension?
I agree with this line extension, but this would not be needed if the City of New York did not eliminate and torn down the 9th Ave EL in the 1940's.
Yes, the IRT 9th Avenue Elevated Line needs to be rebuilt!
@@bennythepenny5831 I agree to that idea too, but the NIMBYS will kill that idea.
@@amazing50000 What about building a new BMT Fulton Street Elevated Line, BMT 3rd Avenue Elevated Line, BMT LaGuardia Elevated Line, BMT Myrtle Avenue Elevated Line, BMT Metropolitan Avenue Elevated Line, IND Merrick Elevated Line, IND Penninsula Boulevard Elevated Line, IND Island Park Elevated Line, IND Webster Avenue Elevated Line, IND 3rd Avenue Elevated Line (Bronx), BMT Fort Hamilton Parkway Elevated Line, & IRT Flatlands Avenue Elevated Line?
@@bennythepenny5831 Yeah, most of them torn down, and if they tried, the NIMBYS will come out in droves.
@@amazing50000 I also propose many subways, while this list is going to be too long!
I have an idea for a video: it’s about the G train. Since 2010, the G train has only ran between Court Square and Church Avenue. When it originally ran local on the Queens Boulevard Line from 71st-Continental to the odd terminus of Smith-9th Streets. My idea is that the G train should run to 71st-Continental again but as a limited rush hour service extension similar to how the W does in Brooklyn. In fact it is possible to implement this service without any construction, aside from the changing of station signage probably. The Court Square station tracks have no bumper blocks and the tracks continue on to Queens Plaza and onto the local route of the Queens Boulevard line, so this special rush hour G train extension is theoretically possible to implement.
Would be good to add extra service but the capacity is a little stretched already. The G, R, V of the past , idk how that worked but if the trains get extended from 4 cars, it would be cool
The should run from Forest Hills-71st Avenue to Coney Island-Surf Avenue, while the (G) should run from Court Square to Church Avenue. Only the should terminate at Forest Hills-71st Avenue, while the [M], [R], & [V] should terminate elsewhere. The should run from Stuyvesant Heights-Bainbridge Street to JFK Airport-TWA Hotel, while the (V) should run from 2nd Avenue to Jamaica-Atlantic Avenue. The should run from Graniteville-Richmond Avenue to Little Bay Park-Cross Island Parkway, while the (R) should run from Bay Ridge-95th Street to Willets Point-World's Fair Marina. The should run from Dyker Beach Park-86th Street to Bronx Park, while the (M) should run from Sunset Park-41st Street to College Point-5th Avenue. The [M] & [R] should be rerouted to the IND Northern Boulevard Line & IND College Point- Line, while the [G] & [V] should run local service on the IND Queens Boulevard Line. The [M] should also be brown again.
queens blvd is at capacity
@@Blackhomeking12 I Said some routes should be rerouted off it, such as the [M] & [R]. There should be a balance.
Church ave is 5 stops beyond Smith/9St Church Ave also has a 2-track stub turn-around pit under the ramp to above-ground elevated trackage
I absolutely love this idea the L train line extended to the upper west side 72st. this would make the far west of midtown, Hell’s Kitchen, Chelsea and the UWS more easier n fast to access. Hopefully the MTA consider this one day! The stations should have modern look while having maybe Art Deco style or anything that pops out with details design like our old architectures!
Get a scooter.
As a person who takes the L train every day I can tell you it would be blessing. I currently take the L to the last stop which is 8th avenue just to take the uptown A C or E to 34th street, I walk to 9th ave to go to work. Why not extend the L train.? You could have done the same thing on the other side. Expanding the L to flatlands Brooklyn. That is a big transit desert. Flatlands currently doesn't have a subway.
How about extend it to kings plaza. I always find it weird that the plaza dont have any trains nearby. If it does, i could see those flatlands nimbys spoiling those plans like they're team rocket.
@@tyshaw1732 I see your point there. There are a lot of good ideas out there. The question is how much and how long? It's never easy when it comes to the MTA. If we are serious enough to improve our subway system, we should be able to do it. Consider this we are constructing a 2nd ave line from Harlem to Hanover Square in the financial district. Not that the district needed it. It has enough. There are a lot transit deserts out there in the outer boroughs than Manhattan.
Yes this idea is awasome.
@@robertlop5 The 2nd Ave. El was on the same route as the 2nd Ave. Subway to Hanover Square.
Flatlands could use some new transit, but the area was built on wetlands - if that problem can be dealt with, I would be all in for it.
When planning such an extention. bellmouths on 14th street facing west towards Hoboken as well as bellmouths on 10th Ave facing south should be build.
This would eventually allow you to build an entire 10th Ave subway as well as a subway below the Hudson.
Optionally plan all station on 10th Ave with extremely wide platforms, so you could cut the platforms back to allow a 4 track subway 10thAve if there is demand.
It’s really hard to build a Four track Subway because it’s so expensive
I thought of this exact idea b4 this video, I’m happy to see it get some extra opinions on it
Great Job this extension should happen 👍🏾👍🏾
Good idea, better than my plans for the 7 to WTC, I think we can still extend the M60 SBS on bus ways to WTC, we should build the QBX project aka Queens Bronx light rail connecter. The purpose of the project is to give the north Bronx a crosstown as well as a connection to queens giving the areas new transit and relieve congestion of the throggs neck bridge. I like the thumbnail. In 2030, the west side skyline will have eternity buildings 3:29
Only one made sense was the 72 sbs
@@RichHomieTjuan they all made sense not just the Q72 SBS
"It's been 84 years" edit: i've been a supporter of this proposal for years. While i normally have it go into queens via northern blvd when making fantasy maps, i could see this thing being sent to the bronx (maybe either covering the western bronx followed by crosstown gun hill rd service or a crosstown line along 161-163 st and Lafayette av)
The {HUG} route should make a giant loop around the city, running on the IND 161st Street Line. The [L] & [S] should only go to Harlem.
Never thought of it but it sounds really interesting. Makes going to places like High Line and other places near the water on the west side very convenient. Walking from 8th to 10th or 11th Ave can be a drag at points.
And that 1/2/3 transfer is a great bookend for the line.
I swear, the MTA might need to hire you.
I lived in canaries for some time and I can honestly say I don't think I ever tool that L train into Manhattan I fell asleep one time on and seen I was underground I was like WTF 😅 😳 I barely went past Broadway junction on the L I'd say they need to extend the other way in Brooklyn toward east Flatbush
I think there was a proposal on extending the Brooklyn end along with other ones for the next 20 years. If they could send it down Flatlands for some miles that would be great
Great idea. However as long as it takes to build anything in NYC if implemented this could take as long as the 2nd AV subway that is not yet completed...hopefully construction would not take 50 years to complete...)-:
The l and 7 lines both cut through the middle of Manhattan. L (14th St) 7 (42ndst) minus Hudson yards.
It's not a bad idea. I wouldn't mind this extension because it'll revitalize the west side. It'll also cut down on the long walk to 8th Ave to catch the train. I was staying on 56th and 9th for a bit and a train on 57 and 10th would have been so convenient.
@Mr.DeStylez And yet you have no issues with the Q train planning to be extended to 125th Street, which is almost the same distance as the L extension?
I mean this is even *more* fantasy, but extending the L to hoboken (and sending the 7 south with one stop at 14th street to Jersey City) makes sense to me. Obviously politics will never allow it, but it would unlock a ton of new ridership back in the reverse direction during rush hours. Would also solve the end of line space issues you highlight.
The should run from Alley Pond Park to Coney Island-Neptune Avenue, while the (7) should run from Flushing-Main Street to Prospect Park. It should run on the new IRT Greenwich Street Line, IRT New York Bay Line, IRT 12th Street Line (Brooklyn), IRT Nostrand Avenue Line, IRT Gravesend Neck Line, & IRT Cropsey Line.
Taking ideas from vanshnookenraggen, I would take this extension one step further and have the line turn back west at 57th Street, with stops at 57th Street - 7th & 8th Avenues (with a connection to the NQRW trains), 5th Avenue, and Lexington Avenue (with a connection to the 4 5 and 6 trains). Then it would run into Queens via a new East River tunnel and connect with the Queensboro Plaza and Queens Plaza stations on the 7 E M N Q And R trains. The extension would then run farther into Queens along Northern Blvd as a 2-track line, with provisions to expand to 4 tracks. There would be local stops at 68 Street, 80 Street, and 89 Street; an express stop at Junction Blvd where local tracks could terminate, and another stop at 108 Street. There would also be provisions to connect to the IND Crosstown line or phase 3 of the Second Avenue Subway if it ever gets built.
After 108 Street, the line would run along the Whitestone Expressway with stops at College Point Blvd, 25 Avenue, 20 Avenue, and the final stop at 14 Avenue.
First and I agree because the L is to short it needs some construction on it my thought I think
The L needs to go to new lots with the 3 or from 14 to Hoyt’s scermerhorn
I agree they should Extend the L train to 72nd street that is brilliant, I love it
I think it should go to 125 street and go east on it until meets Lexington Av line so the Second Avenue Subway can instead go to the Bronx, what are your thoughts about this
This extension is a great idea, and I definitely think it should be done. The only thing, though, is that the 10th Ave / 14th Street station should be on Washington Street instead of 10th Ave, and another station should be added at 50th Street.
I think that the design for the next L train stops in the future will look like the 2nd Avenue Line from the Q or the Hudson Yards station at the 7 train.
The [Q] shouldn't serve the BMT 2nd Avenue Line, as the [I], [T], [Y], {YT}, & {YF} should serve it. The [I] & [Y] should run express, while the [T], {YT}, & {YF} should run local.
When it comes to extending the L train, the idea I had was an extension in the opposite direction, specifically along the route of the former trolley line to Canarsie Pier. But this is good too.
Interesting call. Send it down to Kings Plaza via Ave M (under the creek) and Ave U terminating between Rite Aid and Walgreens with room for two train sets going towards Flatbush with stations at Remsen, E 80, E 71 and Mill Ave as terminus.
@Mr.DeStylez Or we can have both a L train extension to the Canarsie Pier and a 10th Avenue extension to 72nd Street. It will be beneficial for both boroughs and not create negative impacts to existing L train riders, especially since the extension of the Q train to 96th Street and eventually 125th Street, which combined is 3 miles (the same as the L extension to 72nd), isn’t negatively impacting Q train service.
@@davidrivera9743 Honestly that should be left for a new light rail line or something as the L should be used to extend southwards into Canarsie.
@@TheRailLeaguer
How about extending the (L) route westward via Avenue U to Kings Plaza after Seaview Avenue stations would be placed at Remsen Ave, E 80th St, E 71st St, Mill Ave, and Flatbush Ave as the terminal stop
Thoughts on it going into Jersey instead? Construction costs would be wild to send it up to 72nd. I'd even be OK if they had just done tail tracks when the rebuilt the line from Sandy
We need to focus on the city
Send the L to the Jersey and the 7 to DownTown
@@Vryheid extend the M60 SBS to south ferry on the west side a leave the 7 and L alone
@@broyofroyo1207 thats just a Harlem express bus
@@Vryheid no it isn’t
Hudson Yards station is there because the developer paid for it. Interesting idea but really unlikely to happen.
My issue is we need more expansions into Queens and (to a lesser extent) the Bronx more than Manhattan. As of early 2017 (per the Regional Plan Association), only 39% of Queens and 63% of the Bronx is within 1/2 a mile of a subway station compared to 91% of Manhattan. This has led to many stations in Queens (such as Flushing-Main Street) being insanely congested.
We badly need the Queenslink, an extension of the A train east-west in the Bronx, a 7 train extension east, building a Northern Boulevard line to relieve congestion in Flushing, converting the Lower Montauk Branch to subway use (allowing a much quicker path from Jamaica to Long Island City), extending the Queens Boulevard Line further east close to the border, and more.
We need to reroute & extend the [M] route to The Bronx via the IND Northern Boulevard Line & IND College Point Line. There needs to be more Bronx-Queens connections like that.
And here I thought you meant extending the L into canarsie pier
L line once went to Canarsie pier, at street level though
Love the channel! What program/software did you use to map the line extension starting at 2:02?
Brand New Subway
jpwright.github.io/subway/
@@MysticTransit Thank you! Keep the content coming!
@@MysticTransit Thank you!
The extension would be interesting, but you'd need to be able to run 10 car trains on the L, something that's way overdue.
The BMT east stations can only accommodate 8 car trains.
@@Leonard_Wilson the platforms there should've been extended years ago.
I don't slow speeds at terminals delaying trains. Even if the next train during rush hour is 5 minutes or 3 minutes behind it. What may delay is when two trains are at the terminal and the third train has to wait to get in until that train's departure time. I've never heard a conductor say "attention passages we're being delayed because of a slow moving train into the terminal". I've heard them say "we're being delayed because of trains at the terminal waiting for departure". For that case I feel Terminals should be at least three tracks and two islands platforms wide, then that might alleviate some of the delays of trains trying to get into the terminal during rush hour. It works for the (7) at the Flushing Terminal.
I had the same exact observation. This should be a no brainer. The line would become much more useful to Manhattan and ease severe rush hour congestion.
Present this formally!
There should be a 53rd at line going to 11/West End ave, like rerouting the B/D. Also, the L could use an extension in Canarsie
Na instead use BRT
@@broyofroyo1207 what is BRT
If u mean Bus Rapid Transit, it would probably be less convenient as it can get into traffic
@@ezrapotter4631 no it wouldn’t if you had frequency every 4 minutes and bus lanes
This suggestion is great! And it would also promote more growth longer the west side
Yeah
Only thing since the river and West Side Hwy is really close on 10th &14th I was thinking the line can start at 9 Av. then turn on 23 St then continue on to tenth
I definitely agree on this L line extension (though the 10th Avenue/14 St stop might not be needed due to the already sharp curve) It would overall make commute/connections much more easier and faster. However, your brick design concept would make the stations too dark and dim. More Illuminated futuristic designs (ex: Elizabeth & Chengdu Metro) would be ideal
There should be an O train running to 14th and 8th Ave local from Canarsie and new express tracks built for the L which would run express on its current route.
if the O existed im hearing that they want The O to run from Astoria to coney island Via the 3 av line/ astoria express/ culver express thats what im hearing
this isnt new to me because ive been telling people about it. but now it has reached one of the biggest transit youtubers.
Thanks for the video that no one notices. Subscribed :)
This proposal may be more of a reality if a casino gets built in Hudson Yards, though I must say the Second Ave line should be the priority for Manhattan.
For the L extension to Spring Creek, you can put tail tracks for a possible extension into southeastern Queens. While it is better to reactivate the Rockaway Beach Branch it can add more options for Southeastern Queens Riders as most of it is a Transit Desert a terminal in Spring Creek, with rail tracks could allow the L to extend South Ozone Park or Further as it would provide South Queens Riders with a subway with the 3 also being extended to Gateway Center Mall
What crazy fantasy map maker is that?
IDK, I asked him that as well
brand new subway
I'd like to see it go to 125th if it's already headed that far. Stop it under the road between Broadway where the 1 is and Amsterdam or Convent
Good video! I had that similar thought a few years ago. You read my mind. When are you doing the video about extending the F Train to the Cross Island Pkwy Queens/Nassau Border?(UBS Arena)
Excellent video covering many details and a great upgrade to Westside if going to 72 street
Extension to Canarsie pier would benefit people seeking a respite along Jamaica bay
And not to mention add some service coverage on Canarsie, as it’s two stations serve only the Northeast portion of the neighborhood.
Both the 10th Avenue extension and the Canarsie extension can make L train operations better for all riders.
It needs a stop at 11ave 16th street heading north 11ave and 23rd street turning west and terminating at the Hoboken New Jersey Transit hub along with the 7 line extension to Hoboken as well.
Extending the L train north to 72nd St is very interesting. With the development of Hudson Yards that will give the MTA two crosstown trains the L & 7. The 72nd St @ 7th Ave stop is very narrow station, improvements may be needed!! There have been talks about extending the 7 train to New Jersey, how about the L train further north and/or the Q train @ 116th St crossing into Jersey, just a thought!!!!!!
6:01
For your next video, you should do a video about the new third track installed in the Lirr. Just a suggestion. Thanks! And great video!
Oh yes he needs to
Good idea. Considering the heavily industrial nature of the far west side generations ago it's surprising that train service was never built there to begin with but it's also possible that the workforce lived locally and didn't need it.
Important factual error in the video. The design of the 14th Street terminal itself and the bumper blocks do not inconvenience riders by slowing down service. The new South Ferry station, the terminal for the #1 train, has the same design and turns trains around very efficiently. The key is a high-speed switch in front of the station allowing trains to transition quickly into the available receiving track and slowing to a stop in the station. If the L's 14th St terminal is slower, it's because of the switch east of the station. Tail tracks beyond the terminal do help allow the train to enter the station a little faster, but their main value is in allowing the transit authority to store trains so they can be added to service at the following rush hour. However, your extension proposal is very imaginative.
The [L] & {LS} routes should run local on the BMT Canarsie Line, while the [S] should run express. There should be a lower level added. The should run from Harlem-125th Street to Broadway-Corporal Thomson Park, while the (S) should run from 18th Street to Brooklyn Army Terminal. The should run on the BMT West End Avenue Line, BMT 86th Street Line, & BMT 1st Avenue Line. The should run from Harlem-135th Street to Canarsie Pier, while the (L) should run from 34th Street-Hudson Yards to Canarsie-Rockaway Parkway.
While I agree expanding the L train uptown I think they should extend the 7 train to 14th Street between 10th and 11th Ave to connect with the L train. So you'll have plenty of transit in the area
The 7 would be extended to Secaucus.
@@SigmaRho2922 they would have to convert all of the trains to one specification and to run on the same power infrastructure. It's not going to happen. Plus it would kill path train and what would be the point of taking Amtrak then.
@@clays32 The 7 train extension into Secaucus Junction will not replace PATH, NJT, or AmTrak as they will all serve different ridership bases and catchment areas.
Bring the L up 10th Avenue and 50th Street, then onto Northern Blvd in Queens towards Flushing, terminating at Crocheron Avenue. 7 to Hoboken and Jersey City going to Newark via the CNJ Main (Now HBLR) and West Side Ave Branch.
The 7 is already overcrowded in Manhattan, I don’t want to imagine if you put it to Jersey. Extend the L to Jersey, not the 7.
@@peskypigeonx It’s crowded only in a single direction, extending the 7 to Jersey would add ridership in the other direction.
You could also implement a regional rail service along the Port Washington Branch of the LIRR, along with opening infill stops at Elmhurst and Corona, to siphon off riders from the Flushing Line (Also required for any extension of Flushing eastward due to similar crowding issues).
L to coney island via flatlands av, nostrand av and voorhies av would also be good
drive.google.com/file/d/1Kg_F7uCKf_OwOYwK6WCyoDGxK9qoG1uF/view?usp=sharing
I think wider spacing between subway stations in a city with population density as high as Manhattan doesn’t work. However, I would like to see an expansion of commuter rail to compliment subway systems. I was also thinking of extending the J line to connect with the L and then curve right to Columbus circle, making a 59th street crosstown.
This would definitely help the queens residents. Great idea
When I went to Stuyvesant High School 1976-79, I took the 1 train to 14th street and the L line to 1st Avenue. Vice versa home.
Bad, large stop spacing on the Second Avenue Subway made some problems ALREADY, like missing a connection with the M79+. 15 blocks is insane and prohibitive of any bigger development between stations or serving riders effectively.
Maybe 8 blocks is good, why not extend the L even further to 125street and have it run east to Lexington Avenue that way the Second Avenue Subway can go into the Bronx, remember mystic transit’s video on the Throggs neck Subway, the second avenue Subway would go to a terminal near the Throggs Neck Bridge replacing his plans for the Throggs Neck Subway🚇please let me know your thoughts
@@broyofroyo1207 No. Too fantastical. I’d rather have high frequency bus-ferry connections for Throggs Neck.
@@peskypigeonx okay ✅ 🆗👍
What a
@@broyofroyo1207 Update: bus-ferry ideas I was proposing 8 months should not be used on a literal transit solution. Sorry for being a bit mean back then, but the subway line there probably wouldn’t be worth it compared to other solutions. Today, I propose a Bx40/42 light rail solutions to connect riders more frequently to the 6, as well to other areas of the Bronx. This would culminate with a transit mall on Tremont.
@@peskypigeonx I forgive you for being a bit mean back then, your new idea is good 👍 and we can also do more transit improvements that are not high cost
I thought I was the only one who thought of a 10th Avenue extension of the Canarsie Subway, though my plan for that now is far different than before. For instance, the 10th Avenue Subway would run across Bergen County and Manhattan via Fort Lee Tunnel, 10th Avenue, and West Street, and would run alongside an extended 125th Street Subway. It would also include a completely reassigned M 10th Avenue Local that would run between 72nd Street-Broadway and Francis Lewis Boulevard via the 10th Avenue Subway and Myrtle Avenue Subway (a replacement of the old Myrtle Avenue Elevated). The line would also include the O and P 10th Avenue Express that would run between Fort Lee Terminal and Brighton Beach and Coney Island Terminal via the 10th Avenue Subway and extended Brighton Railway.
Am I the only one here who thinks most proposals to extend/build lines within Manhattan would be almost too secondary of a priority compared to building brand new services to more directly connect the outer boroughs to literally any other part of NYC BUT Manhattan?
To compliment the upcoming IBX, perhaps the MTA could substantially rehab the:
>Verrazzano Narrows
>RFK/Triborough
>Throgs Neck
& Whitestone Bridges to ALL eventually handle LRT & buses on top of existing highway capacity? Be it “clip-on’s” being installed outside the existing highway lanes or under the existing bridge decks some way somehow.
Such a thing would overwhelmingly likely take quite a few thousand INTRA-NYC & INTERBOROUGH car trips out of the equation for years to come while what very little highway capacity could be freed up more accordingly for regional & literal interstate traffic (much less commercial vehicles) instead of neighborhood-to-neighborhood/intRAborough and borough to borough. With said highways modernized overtime with said goal in mind- consolidating or even ELIMINATING plentiful redundant ramps within an immediate footprint. The less ramps within a 1-2 mile stretch, the less weaving inbetween, the less interruption for all traffic, the less potential for congestion.
And said dedicated LRT/busways ON said suspension bridges isn’t even addressing the substantial potential to directly connect to SEVERAL existing subway lines within the Bronx, Brooklyn & Queens. To which would be almost a night and day difference for the entire city itself!
Probably, though a modest extension to 42nd Street as a Phase 1 of sorts could provide some increased capacity on the L route (the maximum capacity of the route on either end is 26 trains per hour due to the layout of both terminals. With an extension like that, not only are new areas served, but we could be operating 30 trains per hour to as far as Myrtle-Wyckoff).
i actually dont think its nessecary to put a 14 st 10 av stop because going north on 10 av from there you can imagine how big of a turn the L would make which would mean it would have to go snails pace at the turn causing even more delays
also if ths L train is extended to harlem i propose stops at the following: 79 St, 92 St, 106 St, 116 St, 125 St, 135 St, 145 St, and terminating at 155 St, st nicolas av with free transfer to the C train
Excellent idea. That line should be extended for giving that side of town more choice for transportation.
Imagine the Drip Train going up 10th Avenue
The Archer Avenue Line stations are not without their faults. Have never been able to figure out what they had in mind by making such a narrow stair going east at Sutphin Avenue. There are only two stairs, with the two escalators on the west having a somewhat wider stair in the middle. Was hoping the recent work going on at Archer-Sutphin would be to widen the stair (and get rid of the leg-breaker troughs on the side) but looks like it's just another elevator replacement.
I’d like to see the L be extended to American Dream in NJ. So far, the 7 seems to be the only line rumored to one day get an extension to NJ, possibly Secaucus Junction or Hoboken Terminal. However, I want to see the L be extended to NJ as well, and to the new American Dream mall.
I imagine the extension will go from 14th Street-8th Avenue to 72nd Street like your proposal, but after that it’ll go west under the Hudson River, towards West New York, making a stop at Bergenline Avenue and 60th Street, near Miller Stadium, then go outside the tunnel to go to Tonnelle Avenue for a connection to the Hudson-Bergen Light Rail, after which it’ll travel over Cromakill Creek towards its next stop at I-95 (NJ Turnpike), and then finally it’ll go along Route 3 and make a stop at Paterson Plank Road to provide a bus connection to Secaucus Junction, before going underground again, under the Hackensack River, and terminating at American Dream.
I believe an extension to American Dream will help boost the number of visitors to the struggling mall and even provide a fast way for sports fans to go from the city to the neighboring MetLife stadium without having to drive a car or take the bus.
I know it sounds like a radical idea, but it can definitely work. The Mall could definitely benefit from a Subway extension, and that’s why I believe the L will be able to do just that.
I imagine the station design will probably be similar to that of the 1999 London Underground Jubilee Line extension to Stratford, at least for the terminus at American Dream. For the stations in Manhattan, I’d say they would take some inspiration from the Amsterdam Metro, as well as some of the Elevated stations in NJ. 34th Street-Hudson Yards meanwhile should have a Jules Verne-ish steampunk-style design, similar to that of Arts et Meters station on Line 11 of the Paris Metro, given the neighborhood is in proximity to the Hudson River, hence the name.
Station names for the proposed L extension:
10th Avenue-West 14th Street (Transfer to M14 SBS)
23rd Street (Transfer to M23 SBS)
34th Street-Hudson Yards (Transfer to 7 and M34/A SBS)
42nd Street (Transfer to 7, with passageway to 42nd Street-PABT on the A, C and E)
49th-50th Streets-Hell’s Kitchen
59th Street-John Jay College
65th Street-Lincoln Center (Transfer to 1)
72nd Street-Broadway (Transfer to 1, 2, and 3)
Henry Hudson Parkway-Riverside Park (Transfer to M79 SBS)
West New York-Bergenline Avenue
Tonnelle Avenue (Connect to HBLR)
Secaucus-NJ Turnpike
Paterson Plank Road (Transfer to bus to Secaucus Junction)
MetLife Stadium-American Dream (Connect to NJ Transit)
That was exactly what I was thinking, though my plan takes 69th in New Jersey en route to the Meadowlands.
@NYC Pokemon Fan Definitely.
Honestly, this L train extension is not bad, but it needs to be the last subway extension to be built. In addition, Manhattan doesn't really have many transit deserts.
You still have the East Side with just Lexington Avenue over there, so the need for a full Second Avenue Subway still exists.
Besides, nothing wrong with building more Manhattan projects as they benefit other boroughs as well. That connection at Bleecker Street between the Uptown 6 train and the IND Sixth Avenue Line benefits mainly Brooklyn riders, saving them a decent amount of commuting time.
I actually agree. A priority should be extending the L from Canarsie down to the Pier or Flatlands. Actual transit deserts rather than the West Side.
I’d also like to mention that the reason bus routes on the west ride don’t get much ridership is because their frequencies are atrocious; the only ones that run frequently run crosstown. The development is there (Intrepid, south end of the High Line, Lincoln Sq, a bike path, etc.) but the MTA refuses to run good transit to them. I would absolutely support either an L train extension, or rerouting the 2 or 3 trains to Cristopher st on the PATH for improved 7th ave line headways.
Why not to NJ?
This is a wonderful idea!!!! I wonder if the MTA will open the third track on the Second Avenue line on the ( F) train?!
Greetings Mystic. I would like to see the L train get extended, to head into New Jersey. There was talk about sending the 7 train to New Jersey, over the years, still on the drawing board of the MTA
That is also a sign stating that we need the V route back. Same goes for the H,K,V, and IRT 8 & 9 routes back. As we all know NYC, is well undeserved. Meaning that there are still places that really needs transit due to poor bus service and traffic. Walkers like myself doesn't fall into the category depending on the distance. Maybe we might get the chance to get these routes back. Or rerouted into new. However for this to be successful we need the environmental background checks and the collective funds that is a MUST to support these MTA projects. Of course subway crimes no matter the scale of it, will ultimately interfere with the plans of the MTA. And causing NYC to slowly dwindle or decrease overtime by moving into either another state or a whole other country.
Okay so as a 72nd street resident I don't see how this would work without redoing the whole station
I like extending the L 1 stop to tenth, but I would stretch the 7 down to meet it (along with adding the 42-10th stop) rather than taking this up as the L is somewhat long. It also avoids some excessive transfer duplication. A line that goes from 125 across and then down 10th would be nice but not sure it should be an extension to an existing line or a new one. NYC tends to hate branching so having the 7 go both ways it probably out.
The L route isn’t long as it’s a short 15-mile long route. Therefore extending the L train shouldn’t be an issue, but I’d rather end the extension at 72nd and Amsterdam, with provisions for service to New Jersey.
@Mr.DeStylez Yeah and it’s not that bad or long. Extending it at either end won’t be an issue.
@Mr.DeStylez That’s is totally not true, as I ride the L and it’s not as bad as you think it is. Besides, Washington DC is extending its Silver Line out despite having no express service so why can’t the MTA extend the L train.
@@TheRailLeaguer Maybe the L just feels long due to being all local. In any case would much rather see the 7 turn downtown and the L extend to NJ is it gets extended more than a 10th or 11th stop, maintaining it's east-west(ish) nature.
@Mr.DeStylez Maybe you’re riding a different L train since the L train is alright now. Extending it up the West Side is not stupid and no, it won’t make your current trip much worse. In fact, your argument is actually wrong and stupid since the Second Avenue Subway extension of the Q train exists. The route as well as a few rush hour N trains have been extended 3 miles from 57th to 96th and 2nd and there haven’t been any delays related to that extension. So if the Q route is extended, so can the L route.
M extension from Steinway St. to LGA and terminating at 114st and Roosevelt. transfer to 7 train 111st station
If Mini Metro taught me anything it taught me that this version of the L, going all the way up there when it already goes out to Canarsie, BK, would make the L way too long.
Not really true as the L route is only about 15 miles, and the extension as a whole would only add about 3 miles and about 20 minutes to a
I agree with this, and I have an idea for an L to Canarsie Pier and K/P(Not skip-stop)
The new northern Blvd subway would be perfect for the canarsie line extension constructing from 8 avenue along tenth avenue and 57 or 79 st through the east river and northern Blvd to college point in Queens or past that point
As much as I would love another Manhattan-Queens connections, increased capacity can be solved with some deinterlining on the existing tunnels. Instead, what I recommend is having the L train continue up 10th Avenue to 72nd Street. From there it would then cross the Hudson River into New Jersey and go to the Meadowlands. Not only would this serve the new mall, but this would also allow for additional capacity for folks going to MetLife stadium alongside the existing New Jersey Transit connection. Thus it would alleviate congestion and avoid another MetLife stadium transportation meltdown.
@@TheRailLeaguerthis has nothing to do with deinterlining, I specifically said that the L train does have the potential to extend past beyond 8 avenue terminal and northern Blvd line could be the qualification for the L train extension and the L utilizes 20 tph thanks to CBTC and if including short term points at Willets Points and Atlantic Ave along with the upgrades, the L can get increase of 10 tph maximizing 30 tph between Willets Points and Atlantic Avenue while College Point and Canarsie can still maintain 20 tph
@@ianhardy9375 We do not need the L to enter Queens. Quite frankly you didn’t listen to me since my comment basically says that you can get more train service more effectively between Manhattan and Queens by deinterlining instead of wasting money on another Queens-Manhattan connection for the Canarsie Line. Also the L does not need to enter Queens.
@@TheRailLeaguer the Manhattan and Queens connection was basically a suggestion and I don't need to remind you that the northern Blvd line was recommended by the RPA and that line requires a additional tunnel to make it useable and providing a connection between Manhattan and Queens. The Queens Blvd line is doubtful because I don't know if the split east of 36 street is possible, diverting the service and adding another service on the crosstown is not going to happen since it's not prioritize and the G can hold its own by itself if the MTA do full length of cars and devise a way to restore it's service in Queens. The L train is the logical choice to do the Queens extension past 72nd street which is a good idea but this can go past beyond the terminal and it's similar to 7 not to mention the northern Blvd line parallels the existing 7 and the same goes for the west side and include the upgrades, two short term points to relay extra service and include transfers to the existing lines much like the second avenue subway, you can work around the network and between Willets Points and Atlantic avenue, you can give it an increase of 10 tph thus maximizing the capacity. The L train has that opportunity. I don't why you're commenting about this, I just suggested the idea so there should be no problem
@@TheRailLeaguer
For Northern Blvd I'd propose a 2 track tunnel cutting East-West under 50th Street as a branch of the 10th Avenue Subway the Northern Blvd line would also have provisions to expand Northern with 4 tracks. After Court Square the 2 track branch would connect and would run alongside with the IND Crosstown Line stopping at a new lower level of Queens Plaza with a connection to Queens Blvd and 63rd St tunnel trains, next the line will stop at Broadway/Northern Blvd for a connection to QBL local trains past that station the line will form into 4 tracks. There would be local stops at 68th Street, 80th Street, 89th Street; an express stop at Junction Blvd and another stop at 108th Street then the line would turn northeast after Citified and run along the Whitestone Expwy with an express stop at College Point Blvd where the local tracks could terminate, other stops would be present at 25th Avenue, 20th Avenue and the final stop at 14th Avenue with provisions for a future extension into the Eastern Bronx.
Better project than SAS Phase 3
I’ve been proposing this idea for years tho I would add a 50 st station as well.
This is a great idea - if you build it, they will come. Hopefully this will see shovels in the ground and concrete poured into forms.
could we work togther on a video about extend the expess 6 lie train into westchester couty to meet amtrack at new rochelle.
This is cool. If the 7 train was to be extended past Flushing, which of the following do you think would fit best?
1. 20th Avenue and College Point Boulevard
2. Bell Boulevard in Bay Terrace
3. 225th Street and Northern Boulevard
Ideally the extension of the Flushing Line should operate via Roosevelt Avenue and Northern Blvd as far east as Bell Blvd. This would serve much of Northeast Queens and allow for the bus grid to be straightened out. This also helps to reduce congestion in Flushing since some of the bus routes currently going to Flushing can instead intercept the 7 train sooner, with some riders also opting to transfer to the Q12 bus on the same corridor to also reach Flushing.
@@TheRailLeaguer
What about College Point/Whitestone and Bay Terrace as those resdental areas are major transit deserts plus having the 7 go to College Point or Hoarce Harding from what I'm hearing would have community opposition since those routings would traverse narrow residential streets and indirect routings as well there is a reason why Northern Blvd was chosen for the Flushing Line extension despite it paralleling the Port Washington Branch and even with regional rail suburban commuters are the majority beneficiaries this is nothing different from the Second Avenue Subway.
Personally, I'd extend the L similarly to stations at 14th St. park & Chelsea Waterside Park before plugging it into the 7 line at Hudson Yards.
Alter platforms along the L so the whole 7&L routes from Flushing to Rockaway Park can take the 11 car A division trains the 7 currently uses and run the line as an extended '7' service providing an arc around Midtown linking the major North-South subway trunk lines and providing improved access to the west of Manhattan. This would also combine the 2 most extensive East-West routes across Manhattan island into one service and as all trains would now run through Manhatten you avoid the service frequency bottle necks that both lines are currently susceptible too with all their trains having to terminate and reverse so close to central Manhattan.
With this new line still being grade separated from other subway lines, CBTC signalling and ATO style operations could mean that this line has the shortest headways and, ergo, highest capacity of any line on the system.
That would be too impractical since such a need for a service doesn’t exist. If anything, you’re better off keeping the Canarsie and Flushing Lines separate and extend those services separately (7 to NJ, L via 10th Avenue).
Just extend the l train to tenth avenue and the tail tracks going under 12 avenue and this will allow 25 trains per hour and extended the tail tracks at Canarsie to allow thirty trains per hour and that’s the current capacity of the seven train.
L used to run all the way to Canarsie Pier. Unlikely though that would ever happen. Too many grade crossings for one.
@@alb12345672 L to Canarsie piers should return with capacity improvement
@@alexthemtaandr211weatherfa2 Looking at a map, looks impossible to build today.
all atations on the L extention should have island platofrms to make for easy tranfering
I was thinking extending the L train the Canarsie Pier but sadly that is infeasible anymore
@NYC Pokemon Fan then they have to create a railroad crossing after Canarsie Rockaway Parkway
Please, post more frequently!
I'd say maybe cobalt blue tiling like Wall Street used to have
the station design they put for 2 ave subway, 34 st and 63 st is just down bad
As a Canarsie kid who commuted every day to high school in Hells Kitchen (H.S of Graphic Communication Arts) I wish this extension was available years ago
I like this, I think phase one should be just to 34st but with bellmouths/tail tracks to allow for future extensions like you said
Honestly that phase should go to 42nd Street so it could connect with the 7 train, meaning that the 10th Avenue station on that line would also be built.
@@TheRailLeaguer but based on the route the L will take it’s gonna meet the 7 at 34st, maybe it stops at 10ave-42st too
@@ianrotheroe2540 34th/10th location is a block away from the 7, whereas the 42nd/10th stop will be right above (or below) the 7 train tracks. Also 42nd has a few more connections. About a block from the Port Authority Bus Terminal, and does get you closer to Hells Kitchen and Clinton Hill.
Extending the L as far as 10th Ave. should be a priority. On the other hand, the 7 train's tail tracks go all the way down to 25th St. already. Why not just build a 23rd St. station, with tail tracks down to 21st to serve West Chelsea.
Even if it that station would only serve West Chelsea, it would not serve the whole area effectively by itself. Also the new terminal for the 7 would also need tail tracks since there’s no room for more trains at Corona Yard.
Also it would be better for the 7 to just turn west under the Hudson after 23rd and go to NJ.
I think that this extension should be done since when I want to go to 8th Ave it takes time for the train to get from 6th Ave to 8th Ave since it has to wait for a train to leave the station.
Hey it’s you again
@@broyofroyo1207 hey
@@NYCTrainrider hey
Tenth avenue subway should happen and have the x and p trains,with four tracks and connected to 53st tube.
That's a great Idea 💡. But it would make the L Train 🚉 a much longer rider. And the MTA is'nt going look into send the L as far as to the Upper West Side In Manhattan But might Extend the L Train 🚉 to Chelsea Piers 23 -19 st 11 ave . Sir.
At the 57th Street station, I want a passageway to John Jay College
How did you go on the map and extend the L line?