Hacker News Reader

Comment by Judson | Hacker News Reader

One other cause of delay (which is, anecdotally, present on the L line) is overcrowding. This is, unfortunately, not shown on the MTA's datafeed, though could maybe be estimated by adding the turnstile data?

The morning commute hours (and the hours after a 'delay' status has been cleared) are usually marked by very crowded platforms and trains. Even though the trains are 'on-time' and showing up every 3-5 minutes, there is no room to squeeze on, and you may need to let a few trains pass before getting on one successfully.

A 15 minute train 'delay' during the morning commute could cause an hour+ of backed up platforms and people unable to squeeze on. I think this kind of delay is where a lot of the displeasure with L line service is centered.

View on HN

You perfectly described the issues that exist with the L train. It makes me wonder just why so many people decided to move to a region of Brooklyn with such historically poor subway service, when central Brooklyn, served by the 2,3,4,5 lines, is easily serving its rapidly-gentrifying population with relative ease.

People move to specific neighborhoods for many, many reasons other than available train lines.

Are you from NYC? Because this reads like someone who isn't aware of how important Manhattan access is to somebody making enough money to live on the developed sections of the L line. Bicycle commuting options do exist on the Williamsburg Bridge but it likely owes the newly-congested bicycle lanes to the poor L train service.

I'm finding more and more people that are in the right socioeconomic to live in Williamsburg and similar areas aren't going to Manhattan for work. They're working from home or in Brooklyn based startups.

I work with some of these people, but live in upper Manhattan. I spend a LOT of time commuting to Brooklyn.

Unfortunately all the Brooklyn startups seem to be clustered around DUMBO, which isn't easy to access from Williamsburg on a daily basis (without several subway transfers or traveling through Manhattan).

Well perhaps.

Access to an Internet connection to email mom and dad in the Midwest and ask for more money for rent is also a common preoccupation along the L train corridor set.

It doesn't read that way to me at all. Let's face it, people move to Williamsburg because it's a fun and trendy place to be. Never mind that an increasing number of workplaces are also located in the area, too.

Developers milking the region after the ~2008 zoning changes, availability of space for new constructions, and people willing to move there because of price (originally), proximity to the city, and (more recently) restaurants, parks, Yoga studios, etc.

Of course that was not sustainable long term, but most people didn't think about that, or didn't care.

I live right there in Williamsburg near the Bedford Avenue stop, and the subway issues are generally not a big deal. I can get to Grand Central within 20 to 25 minutes. Importantly, Williamsburg is at a very handy latitude; I can get to the East Village, Union Square, or the West Village in 10 to 15 minutes, and that is more often than not where I want to go. Then there are a ton of great restaurants and bars in the neighborhood, and everyone is pretty young and hip. It's actually under-priced in my view relative to the city (assuming the L doesn't stop running, in which case I will immediately return to Manhattan).

I'm sorry to report that you might have to return http://gothamist.com/2016/01/13/l_train_tunnel_closure_years...

The L's reputation is undeserved; it's just that some people make more noise than others.

I'm extremely happy with the location — it's arguably the most well-positioned area of Brooklyn. Almost everything of interest is 20 minutes or less away: Union Square, Village, SoHo, Midtown, and also transportation hubs like Penn Station and Grand Central. Greenpoint and Long Island City are both a super quick ride, and while south Brooklyn takes longer to get to, I can get to Fort Greene in 17 minutes, and Park Slope in 30. (The most egregious lacuna is to Brooklyn Heights and the surrounding area, but the ferry service is very enjoyable, and the bus is not bad either.)

The main overcrowding occurs during rush hour on the Bedford Ave. and Lorimer St. stops, the former of which is the only stop in a very dense area of recent urban (over)development. Lorimer isn't as bad, and it gets progressively much better the farther out you are.

Given the L's more modern signaling system, they should be able to squeeze more trains on the tracks than they do during the peak rush hour times. I wonder whether they rely on some kind of data that is lagged by a long time period to make those kind of decisions. I'd challenge anyone who contributes to those decisions to ride to Manhattan at 9am and from Manhattan at 6pm for a few weeks.

I think the L fills a unique enough niche in the subway network that making it run even more will just lead to induced demand. There really ought to be another line between Brooklyn and Manhattan that services parts of the L's route.

There is! JMZ

In Brooklyn, yes, sort of. But it doesn't have parity in Manhattan. The J doesn't go uptown and the M is west side only. And the Z? Does that even run anymore?

Z runs during rush hours, I believe. I only see it before 9 am and after 5 pm weekdays.

Also, you can transfer from the M to a whole bunch of other train lines depending on where you are going. It's not the best, but it isn't terrible either.

Induced demand is a good thing for subways!

Induced demand is a good thing for anything. It means people are richer.

Yes, for subways that means less cars too. That is an extra (and very big) benefit, but don't think it's bad on other contexts.

One tough part of the load handling is that if the L has increased capacity, this could, in some cases, just make congestion worse in many other areas because many people need to make at least 1 transfer for their trips.

The tough problem isn't always capacity either. Small disruptions have cascading consequences. This is where I believe a lot of the limitations in service come from since there is rarely a day w/o a single problem. As many others have pointed out in the past, this can largely be traced to the topological properties of the subway lines. The MTA's insistence in growing just a few large bottlenecks rather than disperse them is telling of the problems we'll be living with for decades or centuries longer.

At some point, I think the improved bus service initiatives are our only real hope of directly addressing the transportation problems in NYC. It might seem ludicrous in Manhattan but it certainly has its place and in the other boroughs, it can be a huge improvement when line selection is limited.

> largely be traced to the topological properties of the subway lines

See 'A Subway Named Mobius' [1][2] for some of the problems this might cause in the future!

[1] http://www.iblist.com/book12352.htm

[2] http://www.rioranchomathcamp.com/Topology/SubwayNamedMobius....

The lack of tail tracks at 8th avenue and the current electrical system are the current limitations. They could do more, but they can't turn the trains around fast enough or give enough power to more densely pack trains.

No room to squeeze on? I think you have not seen Japanese rush hour trains :D

Yes I know, not a useful response. I'd prefer not to have to squeeze

Reply on news.ycombinator.com