![\"\"](\"https:\/\/www.vanshnookenraggen.com\/_index\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/05\/Infill-Small_System_Vignelli-480x640.png\")
<\/figure>\n<\/div>\n\n\nRecently, the Mayor of Atlanta announced that the city would be investing in four new MARTA infill stations<\/a>. MARTA (Metropolitan Atlanta Rapid Transit Authority) is one of the typical hybrid metro systems that were built after World War II. MARTA, like WMATA in Washington DC, and BART in the San Francisco Bay Area were designed as a response to urban freeways that had devastated older cities and lead to the growth of auto-dependent suburbs. They are hybrids in the sense that stations in downtown areas are usually spaced closer together (walking distance), while stations outside the city are spaced further apart (driving distance) and often included large park-and-rides.<\/p>\n\n\n\n This set up was designed to allow suburban drivers to keep their cars, but bypass traffic heading downtown. One could argue whether or not this was successful. But viewed in an early 21st Century lens, it seems to have only propagated suburban sprawl since there was no actual incentive to give up ones auto-centric lifestyle. This has far more to do with land use than a road vs. rail debate, and we are beginning to see denser transit-oriented development near existing suburban stations.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Still, suburban oriented transit often featured longer distances between stations. Sometimes this was due to the land use at the time, where new transit lines were built on the bones of older railroads that served small towns. Other times, it was because the lines were specifically designed to allow white suburban riders to pass through poor, minority urban neighborhoods. This is the case with Atlanta, which is using infill stations to right these past wrongs.<\/p> The argument against infill stations is often that adding a stop slows down travel for existing riders. For a small system like MARTA, this really isn’t much of an issue. But for a larger system like New York, there is a balance that needs to be found. In their recent 20-Year Needs Assessment<\/a>, the MTA considered three infill stations: a 10th Ave station on the 7 train, an Elmhurst station on the LIRR Port Washington Branch, and a Sunnyside station on the LIRR Main Line near Queens Plaza. The LIRR often runs through lower socio-economic areas than the ones it serves further out on the island. In this way, infill stations would slow down the trips for whiter, wealthier commuters from further out, and the LIRR leadership (heavily influenced by suburban politicians) have resisted attempts to add stops.<\/p>\n\n\n\n The subway, on the other hand, serves all classes of New Yorker. The bulk of the system was designed before World War 2 and the rise of auto-centric suburbs, meaning that all station stops were placed closer together, within walking distance. Even the former steam and commuter rail lines that were converted into the subway date from a time before widespread car adoption. Therefore, the need for infill stations on the subway is far less than that of the LIRR or other metro systems. Yet, with the cost of constructing new lines in New York astronomically high, many have wondered where infill stops might be built to better serve riders for a fraction of the cost of new lines.<\/p>\n\n\n\n The question of new infill stations comes up a lot on the r\/nycrail subreddit<\/a>. This post in particular received a number of good responses, so I will use this post to respond to many of the proposed stops. My response will be broken into two parts: the stations that won’t work, and the stations that could work. I\u2019m only considering new stations on existing tracks; one station extensions are not considered infill.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Not to fill<\/p>\n\n\n\n East River crossings<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n Being an island, subways between Manhattan and Long Island must dive deep underground to pass under the East River. Or, in the case of the Manhattan and Williamsburg Bridges, rise high into the sky to pass over it. These crossings are often long and in many places pass through neighborhoods with no other subway access. Stations have been suggested at Ave C and 14th St on the L train, 1st Ave and 42nd St on the 7 train, and at Columbia St or Wythe Ave on the Williamsburg Bridge. <\/p>\n\n\n\n To pass below the bottom of the river, tunnels must begin diving early, often immediately after the first\/last stop before the tunnel. River tunnels have some of the steepest grades in the entire system, 4-5%. Likewise, subways which pass over East River bridges have similar, though often softer grades, 3-4%. ADA rules prohibit any new rail station have more than a 2% grade. Therefore, no new stations could be built within existing East River tunnels, nor on the Williamsburg or Manhattan Bridges.<\/p>\n\n\n\n 6th Ave Lower Level<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n The IND 6th Ave Line opened in December 1940. Running from 9th St to 53rd St, this was the final piece of the original IND system to be constructed. The 6th Ave Line was designed to be a 4-track trunk line. Because of the pre-existing Hudson & Manhattan railroad (now, PATH) running between 9th St and 33rd St, the IND opted to only build 2-tracks along this section, with provisions for adding additional tracks later. Local trains from Washington Heights and the Bronx would terminate at 34th St, while express trains from uptown and Queens would continue south on the local tracks.<\/p>\n\n\n\n After the War, the need for the extra capacity became apparent. Proposals to add express tracks were drawn up in 1947, but it would be a decade before the project would be funded and construction started. Two new tracks would be built directly below the Hudson & Manhattan tunnel, connecting the West 4th St station with 34th St. No new stations were proposed, but the tracks were designed to be flat in the event that infill stops were needed.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Today, the 6th Ave Line runs four services, the B\/D express and the F\/M local; express trains skip 14th St and 23rd St. While 23rd St is a major crosstown street, all other trunk lines have only local stations at 23rd St. 14th St, on the other hand, is home to the L train, and all other trunk lines feature express stations at 14th St. Therefore, would it make sense to add platforms to the B\/D express?<\/p>\n\n\n\n Likely, not. A rider coming from uptown has the option of taking the A\/C\/E or 1\/2\/3 trains which stop at 14th St for a transfer to the L. Likewise, anyone from Midtown could also take the N\/Q\/R\/W trains and change at Union Sq. Riders coming from Brooklyn also have options to take the N\/Q trains instead, or transfer to the 6 or F\/M trains at Broadway-Lafayette. 14th St at 6th Ave was once home to large department stores, including the original home of Macy’s before it moved up to 34th St. But today there are far fewer attractions. With plenty of options and less of a reason to go directly to 14th and 6th Ave, few express riders would benefit from a station here.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Prince St and Broadway-Lafayette St<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n While not strictly an infill station, many people have wondered why no transfer was ever built between the R\/W trains at Prince St and the B\/D\/F\/M trains at Broadway-Lafayette St. Underground, the platforms are hardly 80′ apart, and a transfer was built to the 6 train at the Bleecker St station (though, originally only to the downtown platform due to cost.)<\/p>\n\n\n\n Simple connections like this are often called “low-hanging fruit”, but when it comes to ripping up city streets for years of construction, nothing is really “low hanging”. With a unified system since 1940, transfers between lines are free. This means that any rider coming from Union Sq can simply take the 6 train instead of the R\/W trains. Riders coming from further north are that much closer to the B\/D\/F\/M on 6th Ave, and can simply walk there and take the train directly.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Coming from the south and Brooklyn, a rider needing to take a Broadway train has the opportunity to transfer, or take a direct train, from Atlantic Ave, DeKalb Ave, or even Jay St. If a rider is trying to get to Lower Manhattan from the B\/D, then the 6 train serves them just as well as the R\/W would. Therefore, there really is no reason why a connection would need to be built here.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Atlantic Terminal on the Crosstown and Fulton St Lines<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n The IND was designed with many compromises. The Crosstown G train was cobbled together out of a number of previous plans<\/a>. The Fulton St Line started construction before planners knew where it would even go, and tried to tie both together at one point to save money. Being built by the city, civic, political, and special interest groups had far more say in where lines were built than previously. All of this is why the A\/C and G trains don’t actually serve one of the largest transit hubs in Brooklyn.<\/p>\n\n\n\n The LIRR first began running down Atlantic Ave in 1836, and opened a terminal at Flatbush Ave in 1877. The terminal was served by the elevated 5th Ave Line (but not the elevated Fulton St Line), and was the destination for the first subway extension in 1908. Subsequent subway extensions by the IRT and BMT in Brooklyn were centered on Atlantic Terminal, and all IRT and BMT lines stop here.<\/p>\n\n\n Being late to the game, the IND had to work with what was built before it. The choicest underground real estate through downtown Brooklyn had already been claimed by the original subway companies, so the IND had to wind a path through which could serve their new branch lines. This led the IND to choose Jay St-Smith St for its South Brooklyn Line, and Schermerhorn St-Lafayette Ave for its Fulton St and Crosstown Lines. This decision was a poor compromise, all things considered, as it placed the main transfer station (Hoyt-Schermerhorn Sts) two blocks south of the main business and shopping district on Fulton St, and one block north of Atlantic Terminal.<\/p>\n\n\n\n The IND had originally chosen a better path, one which would route their lines along State St and Hanson Pl, right next to Atlantic Terminal. This would have required routing the Crosstown Line down Fulton St, then along Gates Ave, turning north under Throop Ave. This alignment angered local merchants and landowners, who had been “promised” (i.e. paid a tax assessment) a subway under Lafayette Ave as early as 1912, and they fought to have the route changed.<\/p>\n\n\n\n The only way that a Lafayette Ave alignment could work was if the main transfer station was built on Schermerhorn St. In order for the two lines to meet in a way that provided a cross-platform transfer, the station needed to be located further west of Flatbush Ave. Heading east, the Crosstown Line tunnel dives under the Fulton St tunnel, crossing at Fulton St and Lafayette Ave. Here, we find the confusingly named Fulton St station on the Crosstown Line (under Lafayette Ave), and the Lafayette Ave station on the Fulton St Line (which is actually two blocks away from Lafayette Ave!)<\/p>\n\n\n\n A new infill station that would provide a block long connection to Atlantic Terminal could only realistically be built on the local tracks, served by the C. The tunnels here make curves between Schermerhorn St and Lafayette Ave, and between Lafayette Ave and Fulton St. The new station would have to replace the Lafayette Ave stop, as the station spacing is too close. This would disadvantage more riders coming from Clinton Hill. A new station here would be complicated and costly, and not really serve riders heading to Atlantic Terminal all that well; you’d still need an almost 700′ passageway underground to trasnfer. In 2008, former NYC Councilmember Letitia James asked the MTA<\/a> to look into an underground tunnel between the C and G train stations to Atlantic Terminal. I’ve never seen the report, if it was ever produced, but I can’t imagine it was ever a viable solution.<\/p>\n\n\n\n The IND not having a station closer to Atlantic Terminal is certainly a planning blunder, but correcting this mistake would not be worth the high cost and relatively low convenience.<\/p>\n\n\n\n 104th St and Central Park West Express<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n![\"\"](\"https:\/\/www.vanshnookenraggen.com\/_index\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/11\/ad_long_v2.jpg\")
<\/a><\/div>\n\n\n\n![\"Steinway](\"https:\/\/www.vanshnookenraggen.com\/_index\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/05\/IRT-Steinway-Tunnel-960x655.jpg\")
<\/a>![\"Profile](\"https:\/\/www.vanshnookenraggen.com\/_index\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/12\/IND-6-Av-profile.jpg\")
<\/a>![\""Newest](\"https:\/\/www.vanshnookenraggen.com\/_index\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/05\/BE_010325-480x640.jpg\")
<\/a>