Editing IRT Flushing Line (section)

====Unrealized eastern expansion====
The Main Street station was not intended to be the Flushing Line's terminus.<ref name="Raskin-RoutesNotTaken-2013" />{{Rp|49}}<ref>{{cite news|url=https://www.nytimes.com/2014/12/17/dining/critics-notebook-pete-wells-explores-korean-restaurants-in-queens.html?_r=0|title=In Queens, Kimchi Is Just the Start: Pete Wells Explores Korean Restaurants in Queens|last=Wells|first=Pete|date=December 16, 2014|access-date=September 18, 2015|newspaper=[[The New York Times]]|quote=We can blame the IRT. The No. 7 train was never meant to end at Main Street in Flushing.|author-link=Pete Wells}}</ref> While the controversy over an elevated line in Flushing was ongoing in January 1913, the Whitestone Improvement Association pushed for an elevated to [[Whitestone, Queens|Whitestone]], [[College Point, Queens|College Point]], and Bayside. However, some members of that group wanted to oppose the Flushing line's construction if there was not going to be an extension to Whitestone. In January 1913, groups representing communities in south Flushing collaborated to push for an elevated along what was then the LIRR's [[Central Branch (Long Island Rail Road)|Central Branch]],<ref name="Raskin-RoutesNotTaken-2013" />{{Rp|53–55}} in the current right-of-way of [[Kissena Corridor Park]].<ref name="Raskin-RoutesNotTaken-2013" />{{Rp|277}} Shortly after, the New York Public Service Commission (PSC) announced its intent to extend the line as an el from Corona to Flushing, with a possible further extension to [[Little Neck Bay]] in Bayside.<ref name="Raskin-RoutesNotTaken-2013" />{{Rp|56}} There was consensus that the line should not abruptly end in Corona, but even with the {{Convert|5.5|mi|km|-long|adj=mid}} extension to Bayside, the borough would still have fewer Dual Contracts route mileage than either Brooklyn or the Bronx. ''The'' ''New York Times'' wrote that compared to the Bronx, Queens would have far less subway mileage per capita even with the Flushing extension.<ref>{{Cite news|url=https://timesmachine.nytimes.com/timesmachine/1913/02/09/100253625.pdf|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20220518040930/https://timesmachine.nytimes.com/timesmachine/1913/02/09/100253625.pdf|url-status=dead|archive-date=May 18, 2022|title=Extension of Corona Line to Bayside Will Benefit Flushing Section of Queens|date=February 9, 1913|work=The New York Times|access-date=September 30, 2017|language=en-US|issn=0362-4331}}</ref>

The Bayside extension was tentatively approved in June 1913, but only after the construction of the initial extension to Flushing.<ref name="Raskin-RoutesNotTaken-2013" />{{Rp|61}} Under the revised subway expansion plan put forth in December 1913, the Flushing Line would be extended past Main Street, along and/or parallel to the right-of-way of the nearby [[Port Washington Branch]] of the LIRR towards Bell Boulevard in Bayside. A spur line would branch off north along 149th Street towards College Point.<ref>{{cite news|url=https://timesmachine.nytimes.com/timesmachine/1913/12/04/100666082.pdf|title=Flushing Line Risk Put on the City – Interborough Agrees to Equip and Operate Main St. Branch, but Won't Face a Loss – It May Be a Precedent – Company's Letter Thought to Outline Its Policy Toward Future Extensions of Existing Lines|date=December 4, 1913|newspaper=[[The New York Times]]|access-date=September 18, 2015}}</ref>

In 1914, the PSC chairman and the commissioner committed to building the line toward Bayside. However, at the time, the LIRR and IRT were administered separately, and the IRT plan would require rebuilding a section of the Port Washington branch between the [[Broadway (LIRR station)|Broadway]] and [[Auburndale (LIRR station)|Auburndale]] stations. The LIRR moved to block the IRT extension past Flushing since it would compete with the Port Washington Branch service in Bayside.<ref name="Raskin-RoutesNotTaken-2013" />{{Rp|62}} One member of the United Civic Association submitted a proposal to the LIRR to let the IRT use the Port Washington Branch to serve Flushing and Bayside, using a connection between the two lines in Corona.<ref name="Raskin-RoutesNotTaken-2013" />{{Rp|63}} The PSC supported the connection as an interim measure, and on March 11, 1915, it voted to let the Bayside connection be built. Subsequently, engineers surveying the planned intersection of the LIRR and IRT lines found that the IRT land would not actually overlap with any LIRR land.<ref name="Raskin-RoutesNotTaken-2013" />{{Rp|63}}<ref>{{Cite news|url=https://bklyn.newspapers.com/image/55624881/?terms=railroad|title=McCall and Maltbie Favor Transit Plan|date=March 6, 1915|work=[[Brooklyn Daily Eagle]]|access-date=September 30, 2017|page=4|language=en|via=[[Newspapers.com]]}}</ref> The LIRR president at the time, [[Ralph Peters (LIRR)|Ralph Peters]], offered to lease the Port Washington and [[Whitestone Branch]]es to the IRT for rapid transit use for $250,000 annually ({{Inflation|index=US|value=250000|start_year=1915|r=-4|fmt=eq}}), excluding other maintenance costs. The lease would last for ten years, with an option to extend the lease by ten more years. The PSC favored the idea of the IRT being a lessee along these lines, but did not know where to put the Corona connection.<ref name="Raskin-RoutesNotTaken-2013" />{{Rp|64}} Even the majority of groups in eastern Queens supported the lease plan.<ref>{{Cite news|url=https://timesmachine.nytimes.com/timesmachine/1915/04/02/106731397.pdf|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20220518040931/https://timesmachine.nytimes.com/timesmachine/1915/04/02/106731397.pdf|url-status=dead|archive-date=May 18, 2022|title=9-FOOT PETITION FOR CARS.; Service Board Gets Plea of Several Long Island Towns.|date=April 2, 1915|work=The New York Times|access-date=September 30, 2017|language=en-US|issn=0362-4331}}</ref> The only group who opposed the lease agreement was the Flushing Association, who preferred a previous plan to build the Corona Line extension as a subway under Amity Street (currently Roosevelt Avenue), ending at Main Street.<ref name="Raskin-RoutesNotTaken-2013" />{{Rp|64–65}}

Afterward, the PSC largely ignored the lease plan since it was still focused on building the first phase of the Dual Contracts. The Flushing Business Men's Association kept advocating for the Amity Street subway, causing a schism between them and the rest of the groups that supported the LIRR lease. Through the summer of 1915, the PSC and the LIRR negotiated the planned lease to $125,000 a first year, {{Inflation|index=US|value=125000|start_year=1915|r=-4|fmt=eq}}, with an eight percent increase each year; the negotiations then stalled in 1916.<ref name="Raskin-RoutesNotTaken-2013" />{{Rp|65–66}} The Whitestone Improvement Association, impatient with the pace of negotiations, approved of the subway under Amity Street even though it would not serve them directly.<ref name="Raskin-RoutesNotTaken-2013" />{{Rp|66}}<ref name=":0a">{{Cite news|url=https://bklyn.newspapers.com/image/55283201/|title=Now Urge Action on Old Transit Plan|date=March 29, 1916|work=Brooklyn Daily Eagle|access-date=September 30, 2017|page=14|language=en|via=[[Newspapers.com]]}}</ref> The PSC's chief engineer wrote in a report that a combined 20,600 riders would use the Whitestone and Bayside lines each day in either direction, and that by 1927, there would be 34,000 riders per day per direction.<ref name=":0a" /><ref name="Raskin-RoutesNotTaken-2013" />{{Rp|67}} The Third Ward Rapid Transit Association wrote a report showing how much they had petitioned for Flushing subway extensions to that point, compared to how little progress they had made in doing so.<ref>{{Cite news|url=https://bklyn.newspapers.com/image/55315628/|title=Work for Transit is Called Wasted|date=May 18, 1916|work=Brooklyn Daily Eagle|access-date=September 30, 2017|page=4|language=en|via=[[Newspapers.com]]}}</ref> Negotiations continued to be stalled in 1917.<ref name="Raskin-RoutesNotTaken-2013" />{{Rp|67}} Despite the line not having been extended past Corona yet, the idea of a subway extension to [[Little Neck, Queens|Little Neck]] encouraged development there.<ref name="Raskin-RoutesNotTaken-2013" />{{Rp|68}}

The Whitestone Branch would have had to be rebuilt if it were leased to the subway, with [[Level crossing|railroad crossings]] removed and the [[Single-track railway|single track]] doubled. The PSC located 14 places where crossings needed to be eliminated. However, by early 1917, there was barely enough money to build the subway to Flushing, let alone a link to Whitestone and Bayside.<ref name="Raskin-RoutesNotTaken-2013" />{{Rp|68}} A lease agreement was announced on October 16, 1917,<ref>{{Cite news|url=https://bklyn.newspapers.com/image/55296476/|title=Agree on tentative Plan for Lease of Tracks in 3rd Ward|date=October 16, 1917|work=Brooklyn Daily Eagle|access-date=September 30, 2017|page=14|language=en|via=[[Newspapers.com]]}}</ref> but the IRT withdrew from the agreement a month later, citing that it was inappropriate to enter such an agreement at that time.<ref name="Raskin-RoutesNotTaken-2013" />{{Rp|68}} Thereafter, the PSC instead turned its attention back to the Main Street subway extension.<ref name="Raskin-RoutesNotTaken-2013" />{{Rp|71}}

Even after the Main Street station opened in 1928, efforts to extend the line past Flushing persisted. In 1928, the [[New York City Board of Transportation]] (BOT) proposed allowing IRT trains to build a connection to use the Whitestone Branch, but the IRT did not accept the offer since this would entail upgrading railroad crossings and the single-tracked line. Subsequently, the LIRR abandoned the branch in 1932.<ref name="Raskin-RoutesNotTaken-2013" />{{Rp|72}} As part of the 1929 [[IND Second System]] plan, the Flushing Line would have had branches to [[College Point, Queens|College Point]] and [[Bayside, Queens|Bayside]] east of Main Street.<ref name="Raskin-RoutesNotTaken-2013">{{Cite Routes Not Taken}}</ref><ref name="IND2ndSystem1929Map">[[:File:1929 IND Second System.jpg|Board of Transportation of the City of New York Engineering Department, Proposed Additional Rapid Transit Lines And Proposed Vehicular Tunnel]], dated August 23, 1929</ref><ref name="NYTimes-OurGreatSubway-IND2ndSystem-1929">{{cite news|last1=Duffus|first1=R.L.|title=Our Great Subway Network Spreads Wider – New Plans of Board of Transportation Involve the Building of More Than One Hundred Miles of Additional Rapid Transit Routes for New York|url=https://timesmachine.nytimes.com/timesmachine/1929/09/22/91938390.pdf|newspaper=[[The New York Times]]|access-date=August 19, 2015|date=September 22, 1929}}</ref> That plan was revived in 1939.<ref name="IND2ndSystem1939Map">[//upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/b/b3/1939_IND_Second_System.jpg Project for Expanded Rapid Transit Facilities, New York City Transit System], dated July 5, 1939</ref> The BOT kept proposing an extension of the Flushing Line past Main Street until 1945, when [[World War II]] ended and new budgets did not allow for a Flushing extension. Since then, several [[New York City Transit Authority]] proposals for an eastward extension have all failed.<ref name="Raskin-RoutesNotTaken-2013" />{{Rp|72}}