RR503 Posted January 25, 2018 Share #276 Posted January 25, 2018 (edited) 14 minutes ago, Around the Horn said: Thats the whole point... The ESI was meant to test the idea of modernization and design build before moving to the larger and more high impact stations. Did it really need to be tested so many times though? I'd be all for a handful of proofs-of-concept, but 32? Really? That seems like superficiality and ignorance trumping actual system needs. And don't tell me these renovations were slated anyway -- ESI added an average of 15 million per station to construction costs, so if the MTA wanted to do things cheaply, they would have run a three-station (or something like that) pilot, and then kept the rest as they were. Those extra millions could go towards the necessary stuff. Edited January 25, 2018 by RR503 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RR503 Posted January 25, 2018 Share #277 Posted January 25, 2018 (edited) Plz delete.... IDK what's happening to me -- that's two double posts in the last few days.... Edited January 25, 2018 by RR503 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bobtehpanda Posted January 25, 2018 Share #278 Posted January 25, 2018 9 minutes ago, Around the Horn said: Thats the whole point... The ESI was meant to test the idea of modernization and design build before moving to the larger and more high impact stations. All it did was modernize stations in exactly the same shape they were in before. No new staircases or entrances were added. 22 minutes ago, RR503 said: You know, I'm all for station renovation, but spending so much on the stations they chose (except for the Penn pair) seems like a waste. They're mostly medium/low ridership local stops, with little larger systemic relevance. If the MTA is gonna invest in stations, they should work on deknotting major complexes like Union Square, 14th/6th/7th, 3rd Ave-149th, Atlantic Barclays, Herald Square, and Lex-59 (I would include GC ofc, but that's already being done). Aesthetics aside, those stations' designs have significant effects on train peformance, so spending a cool billion on these facelifts for minor players seems really misguided in this era. They should be working on increasing stair capacity/changing placement, adding mezzanie space (if at all possible), and widening platforms (again, if at all possible). Imagine what a billion dollars tied to design-build contracts could do for those stations -- and for the system as a whole... I think the major transfer complex that needs TLC is Canal St. Place is a damn hazard. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bobtehpanda Posted January 25, 2018 Share #279 Posted January 25, 2018 To add onto the point, we should really make One-Vanderbilt type development the norm. No permits unless you physically improve transit. My current home state requires all developers and employers to have transportation mitigation plans, and to pay fees into a transportation mitigation fund if they fail to meet targets. 5 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Via Garibaldi 8 Posted January 25, 2018 Share #280 Posted January 25, 2018 (edited) 25 minutes ago, RR503 said: Did it really need to be tested so many times though? I'd be all for a handful of proofs-of-concept, but 32? Really? That seems like superficiality and ignorance trumping actual system needs. And don't tell me these renovations were slated anyway -- ESI added an average of 15 million per station to construction costs, so if the MTA wanted to do things cheaply, they would have run a three-station (or something like that) pilot, and then kept the rest as they were. Those extra millions could go towards the necessary stuff. Let's be honest here... Not only are the signals dated, but many of the stations could use all of the help they could get. You either spend the money now to rehab them or wait and let the stations turn into the mess we had on the Sea Beach line where numerous stations were literally falling apart, and then you have to shut them down and throw more money at them or risk someone getting injured or killed from crumbling infrastructure and subsequent lawsuits. Edited January 25, 2018 by Via Garibaldi 8 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RR503 Posted January 25, 2018 Share #281 Posted January 25, 2018 34 minutes ago, Via Garibaldi 8 said: Let's be honest here... Not only are the signals dated, but many of the stations could use all of the help they could get. You either spend the money now to rehab them or wait and let the stations turn into the mess we had on the Sea Beach line where numerous stations were literally falling apart, and then you have to shut them down and throw more money at them or risk someone getting injured or killed from crumbling infrastructure and subsequent lawsuits. True, but a full glitzy rebuild in ESI style is not necessary. Those cost extra, and therefore should not be undertaken unless justifiable. I'm not arguing that we ignore stations, I'm arguing that we try to address the highest risk/system impact stations -- those where platform crowding is a major issue, those where structural integrity is questionable, those where station design constricts pedestrian capacity, and those where service delivery is being hindered by dwell times. Those are the biggest issues here. And those are the ones not being addressed by ESI. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NewFlyer 230 Posted January 25, 2018 Share #282 Posted January 25, 2018 It makes sense to postpone this project to focus on other important things in the system that need to be taken care of such as the signaling and etc. However I can’t help but wonder why some of the really horrible looking stations were chosen and to me it seems like stations were randomly chosen. Like for example how does 57th Street on the F line need a serious rehab compared Bowery, Canal Street and oh gosh Chambers on the line. I could think of other places that should be focused on like 21st and making the terminal Court Square nicer and more updated. Forest Hills should get rehabbed too just because it is a major stop and the terminal for the and . But hey it is what it is, right. If I were in charge of the project I would rehab major stations and or terminals that haven’t been rehabbed recently and stations that are in bad condition. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Via Garibaldi 8 Posted January 25, 2018 Share #283 Posted January 25, 2018 (edited) 20 minutes ago, NewFlyer 230 said: It makes sense to postpone this project to focus on other important things in the system that need to be taken care of such as the signaling and etc. However I can’t help but wonder why some of the really horrible looking stations were chosen and to me it seems like stations were randomly chosen. Like for example how does 57th Street on the F line need a serious rehab compared Bowery, Canal Street and oh gosh Chambers on the line. I could think of other places that should be focused on like 21st and making the terminal Court Square nicer and more updated. Forest Hills should get rehabbed too just because it is a major stop and the terminal for the and . But hey it is what it is, right. If I were in charge of the project I would rehab major stations and or terminals that haven’t been rehabbed recently and stations that are in bad condition. Well because 57th street is in the heart of Midtown in our Central Business District, not to mention tourists and others that use the station. I would definitely rehab that one, and especially Rockefeller Center. Just imagine what a tourist thinks seeing 47th-50th street which is not only dated, but reeks of piss and God knows what else. It's also incredibly confusing in terms of the layout of the turnstiles. You exit a set of turnstiles and think you can continue walking underground, only to find out that you can't because to do so, you'd have to pay again to enter the system. It's a joke, and defeats the idea of an "underground passageway". We can't be Manhattan centric, but at the same time, our subway stations in some of the most important parts of the city should not look the way that they do. It's an embarrassment as New Yorkers to have our subways looking like that. Edited January 25, 2018 by Via Garibaldi 8 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lance Posted January 25, 2018 Share #284 Posted January 25, 2018 Just to correct something, the passageways at Rockefeller Center are as such because most of it is run by the Rockefeller Group and not the MTA. That's why it's so segregated and meandering, especially on the weekends when the Rockefeller West buildings are closed. As for the design, that also falls under the privately owned Group. The MTA can and should do something about the entrances at 47th and 48th Street, which are under their jurisdiction, but I don't think they'd be able to do anything about the northernmost entrances at 49th and 50th Streets. I share a lot of the same sentiments on the nature of some of these stations. I know that everyone likes to elevate the aging signals and tracks as paramount concerns, but the stations matter just as much. Remember, the stations are the first impression riders get of the subway. We have to make it so that even if the trains are delayed as they usually are, riders are not waiting on platforms that haven't seen a power wash or maintenance repairs done in several years. This is why I'm in support of the ESI program, even if it is a flawed concept. Infrastructure and stations cannot be issues of absolutes, but instead part of the whole initiative to improve the subway. We cannot simply state that since the signals are so bad, we should not put money into station renovations. In my opinion, that is a ludicrous ideology to have. On a side note because it keeps coming up, why are countdown clocks always considered luxury items and something that should not be bothered with? In an article from the Times, DeBlasio is quoted saying “The countdown clocks and the Wi-Fi and painting, having lights on bridges — all that stuff doesn’t matter compared to your subway actually arriving where it’s supposed to arrive on time.” I understand the sentiment behind wanting trains to run with less delays, but this is 2018, not the 1980s. I shouldn't have to pray to the subway gods to determine when my next train will arrive. I, like a lot of people, actually want to know when the train is coming or if I should consider alternate methods of travel. Countdown clocks are a necessity in this day and age, not a luxury. Even more so given the propensity for things to go belly up at a moment's notice. Same thing with in-station internet access. 7 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Via Garibaldi 8 Posted January 25, 2018 Share #285 Posted January 25, 2018 (edited) 10 minutes ago, Lance said: Just to correct something, the passageways at Rockefeller Center are as such because most of it is run by the Rockefeller Group and not the MTA. That's why it's so segregated and meandering, especially on the weekends when the Rockefeller West buildings are closed. As for the design, that also falls under the privately owned Group. The MTA can and should do something about the entrances at 47th and 48th Street, which are under their jurisdiction, but I don't think they'd be able to do anything about the northernmost entrances at 49th and 50th Streets. I share a lot of the same sentiments on the nature of some of these stations. I know that everyone likes to elevate the aging signals and tracks as paramount concerns, but the stations matter just as much. Remember, the stations are the first impression riders get of the subway. We have to make it so that even if the trains are delayed as they usually are, riders are not waiting on platforms that haven't seen a power wash or maintenance repairs done in several years. This is why I'm in support of the ESI program, even if it is a flawed concept. Infrastructure and stations cannot be issues of absolutes, but instead part of the whole initiative to improve the subway. We cannot simply state that since the signals are so bad, we should not put money into station renovations. In my opinion, that is a ludicrous ideology to have. On a side note because it keeps coming up, why are countdown clocks always considered luxury items and something that should not be bothered with? In an article from the Times, DeBlasio is quoted saying “The countdown clocks and the Wi-Fi and painting, having lights on bridges — all that stuff doesn’t matter compared to your subway actually arriving where it’s supposed to arrive on time.” I understand the sentiment behind wanting trains to run with less delays, but this is 2018, not the 1980s. I shouldn't have to pray to the subway gods to determine when my next train will arrive. I, like a lot of people, actually want to know when the train is coming or if I should consider alternate methods of travel. Countdown clocks are a necessity in this day and age, not a luxury. Even more so given the propensity for things to go belly up at a moment's notice. Same thing with in-station internet access. I can personally say that I actually try to avoid using the 47-50th street station just because it so drab and the MVM machines are pretty bad. I go to the Bryant Park station instead, which is by no means spotless, but it's been updated and looks a bit better overall, and the placing of the arrival clocks are also quite helpful, whereas at the 47-50th street station, I have no idea when a train will arrive (I seem to have the worst luck with long waits at that station for some reason too) and the platform stinks, along with the rats on the tracks. It actually reminds me of the 2nd Avenue station on the Lower East Side, which is not a good thing in the heart of the financial district. As you said, if the is going to attract riders who may be split between taking the subway and using other means, these are the types of things that make a difference. Edited January 25, 2018 by Via Garibaldi 8 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LGA Link N Train Posted January 25, 2018 Share #286 Posted January 25, 2018 (edited) 18 hours ago, Via Garibaldi 8 said: Let's be honest here... Not only are the signals dated, but many of the stations could use all of the help they could get. You either spend the money now to rehab them or wait and let the stations turn into the mess we had on the Sea Beach line where numerous stations were literally falling apart, and then you have to shut them down and throw more money at them or risk someone getting injured or killed from crumbling infrastructure and subsequent lawsuits. Well, all I can say is that the Rehabilitation of Sea beach and Culver is necessary. Wanna what's even more necessary, the Nassau Street corridor 4 hours ago, NewFlyer 230 said: It makes sense to postpone this project to focus on other important things in the system that need to be taken care of such as the signaling and etc. However I can’t help but wonder why some of the really horrible looking stations were chosen and to me it seems like stations were randomly chosen. Like for example how does 57th Street on the F line need a serious rehab compared Bowery, Canal Street and oh gosh Chambers on the line. I could think of other places that should be focused on like 21st and making the terminal Court Square nicer and more updated. Forest Hills should get rehabbed too just because it is a major stop and the terminal for the and . But hey it is what it is, right. If I were in charge of the project I would rehab major stations and or terminals that haven’t been rehabbed recently and stations that are in bad condition. Well, here's an updated ESI (not really) Bowery Canal Street Chambers Street 14 Street-6 Ave 47-50 Streets-Rockfeller Center Court Square 21 Street Northern Blvd 63 Drive 67 Avenue Forest Hills - 71 Avenue York street 34 Street Penn Station and Queensboro Plaza Astoria Blvd Those are stations that I think NEED the ESI program that I can think of for now cause this list can keep going on forever. Note that I have never been to the Bronx so I couldn't list any stations from there Edited January 25, 2018 by LGA Link N train Forgot a few things 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Around the Horn Posted January 25, 2018 Author Share #287 Posted January 25, 2018 21 minutes ago, LGA Link N train said: Well, all I can say is that the Rehabilitation of Sea beach and Culver is necessary. Wanna what's even more necessary, the Nassau Street corridor Well, here's an updated ESI (not really) Bowery Canal Street Chambers Street 14 Street-6 Ave 47-50 Streets-Rockfeller Center Court Square 21 Street Northern Blvd 63 Drive 67 Avenue Forest Hills - 71 Avenue York street 34 Street Penn Station and Queensboro Plaza Astoria Blvd Those are stations that I think NEED the ESI program that I can think of for now cause this list can keep going on forever. Note that I have never been to the Bronx so I couldn't list any stations from there Most of those stations are already receiving or scheduled to receive component repairs and/or full renovations 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RR503 Posted January 25, 2018 Share #288 Posted January 25, 2018 (edited) 5 hours ago, Lance said: I share a lot of the same sentiments on the nature of some of these stations. I know that everyone likes to elevate the aging signals and tracks as paramount concerns, but the stations matter just as much. Remember, the stations are the first impression riders get of the subway. We have to make it so that even if the trains are delayed as they usually are, riders are not waiting on platforms that haven't seen a power wash or maintenance repairs done in several years. This is why I'm in support of the ESI program, even if it is a flawed concept. Infrastructure and stations cannot be issues of absolutes, but instead part of the whole initiative to improve the subway. We cannot simply state that since the signals are so bad, we should not put money into station renovations. In my opinion, that is a ludicrous ideology to have. I don't disagree, but I think you're conflating some things here. I think many, many stations in the system could look at the very least passable if they got a good wash -- something much less drastic and costly than the ESI program. I spoke with the head of station environment once, and he said that his department hadn't seen any meaningful budget increase since the early 2000s despite increased ridership. If that changed, I think many, many stations would become livable again. As for the more needy cases, I again don't think ESI is the solution. Almost every station in the system could be updated more than aesthetically. New entrances, more mezzanie space, and ADA accessibility could all be added during these station shutdowns -- but they aren't. ESI is a solely cosmetic program, doing nothing to ameliorate those other issues. I think if we're gonna spend the money on stations, we need to spend it wisely -- ie not on charging ports, but on the things listed above. The average ESI project cost $15 million more than comperable, non-ESI station projects. If we repurposed that premium for functionality projects rather than aesthetic ones, imagine what could be done? (Re)opened staircases, elevators, improved fare control areas, better signage, well-placed countdown clocks, etc. And think about the systemic benefits from reduced platform crowding if spent in higher-ridership stations. Look, I have no problem with ESI's theory -- that environment matters too. I just think that in its execution, it became a politically motivated, badly aimed, poorly timed monetary vacuum cleaner. Edited January 25, 2018 by RR503 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Via Garibaldi 8 Posted January 25, 2018 Share #289 Posted January 25, 2018 1 minute ago, RR503 said: I don't disagree, but I think you're conflating some things here. I think many, many stations in the system could look at the very least passable if they got a good wash -- something much less drastic and costly than the ESI program. I spoke with the head of station environment once, and he said that his department hadn't seen any meaningful budget increase since the early 2000s despite increased ridership. If that changed, I think many, many stations would become livable again. As for the more needy cases, I again don't think ESI is the solution. Almost every station in the system could be updated more than aesthetically. New entrances, more mezzanie space, and ADA accessibility could all be added during these station shutdowns -- but they aren't. ESI is a solely cosmetic program, doing nothing to ameliorate those other issues. I think if we're gonna spend the money on stations, we need to spend it wisely -- ie not on charging ports, but on the things listed above. The average ESI project cost $15 million more than comperable, non-ESI station projects. If we repurposed that premium for functionality projects rather than aesthetic ones, imagine what could be done? (Re)opened staircases, elevators, improved fare control areas, better signage, well-placed countdown clocks, etc. And think about the systemic benefits from reduced platform crowding if spent in higher-ridership stations. Look, I have no problem with ESI's theory -- that environment matters too. I just think that in its execution, it became a politically motivated, badly aimed, poorly timed monetary vacuum cleaner. Cleanliness is a separate issue though, but that is something that should be addressed. You have to think about the wear and tear that these stations take. Underground, they are exposed to the elements, and the same is true above ground. We should be looking to keep our stations in a state of good repair, which also includes cleaning, which as far as I'm concerned is far more than dragging some garbage bags across a platform leaving whatever spills out to sit and permeate. I saw a similar sight just last Saturday morning at Penn Station on the platform, and it was far too early in the morning for all of that to be all over the platform spilled about, so it was clear that it hadn't been cleaned the night before. One thing that I've become much more aware of is the issue of a lack of entrances and exists with some of the types of stations that are part of this ESI program. I would love to see several stations on the line up for this. The entrances are so narrow and limited, and it takes forever to get in and out the stations along the Upper West Side. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LGA Link N Train Posted January 25, 2018 Share #290 Posted January 25, 2018 Something randomly I wanna point out. I remember in one of RPA's articles they said that we can improve the stations along the line during the Canarsie closure. Here's the link where there is a PDF download http://www.rpa.org/article/new-l-train-for-new-yorkers 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wallyhorse Posted January 31, 2018 Share #291 Posted January 31, 2018 On 1/25/2018 at 12:36 PM, Lance said: Just to correct something, the passageways at Rockefeller Center are as such because most of it is run by the Rockefeller Group and not the MTA. That's why it's so segregated and meandering, especially on the weekends when the Rockefeller West buildings are closed. As for the design, that also falls under the privately owned Group. The MTA can and should do something about the entrances at 47th and 48th Street, which are under their jurisdiction, but I don't think they'd be able to do anything about the northernmost entrances at 49th and 50th Streets. I share a lot of the same sentiments on the nature of some of these stations. I know that everyone likes to elevate the aging signals and tracks as paramount concerns, but the stations matter just as much. Remember, the stations are the first impression riders get of the subway. We have to make it so that even if the trains are delayed as they usually are, riders are not waiting on platforms that haven't seen a power wash or maintenance repairs done in several years. This is why I'm in support of the ESI program, even if it is a flawed concept. Infrastructure and stations cannot be issues of absolutes, but instead part of the whole initiative to improve the subway. We cannot simply state that since the signals are so bad, we should not put money into station renovations. In my opinion, that is a ludicrous ideology to have. On a side note because it keeps coming up, why are countdown clocks always considered luxury items and something that should not be bothered with? In an article from the Times, DeBlasio is quoted saying “The countdown clocks and the Wi-Fi and painting, having lights on bridges — all that stuff doesn’t matter compared to your subway actually arriving where it’s supposed to arrive on time.” I understand the sentiment behind wanting trains to run with less delays, but this is 2018, not the 1980s. I shouldn't have to pray to the subway gods to determine when my next train will arrive. I, like a lot of people, actually want to know when the train is coming or if I should consider alternate methods of travel. Countdown clocks are a necessity in this day and age, not a luxury. Even more so given the propensity for things to go belly up at a moment's notice. Same thing with in-station internet access. Absolutely. DeBlasio needs to realize this is not 1978 but 2018 and solid, secure Wi-Fi should be paramount. People needing to be able to access their phones WITHOUT having to use 3G/4G Data is much more important now, especially in finding out if there are issues. Countdown clocks are extremely important in this day and age as well. As for 57th Street, I can see where that station needs to be worked on even though it is still a relatively new station (compared to much of the rest of the system) that opened in 1968. It is heavily used by tourists and along with Rockefeller Plaza are among the most important stations in the system. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CenSin Posted January 31, 2018 Share #292 Posted January 31, 2018 11 minutes ago, Wallyhorse said: Absolutely. DeBlasio needs to realize this is not 1978 but 2018 and solid, secure Wi-Fi should be paramount. People needing to be able to access their phones WITHOUT having to use 3G/4G Data is much more important now, especially in finding out if there are issues. Countdown clocks are extremely important in this day and age as well. As for 57th Street, I can see where that station needs to be worked on even though it is still a relatively new station (compared to much of the rest of the system) that opened in 1968. It is heavily used by tourists and along with Rockefeller Plaza are among the most important stations in the system. You’ve got a lot of priorities bent: racetracks casinos tourists school campuses hospitals That’s not the primary focus of any station. 6 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
itmaybeokay Posted February 16, 2018 Share #293 Posted February 16, 2018 On 1/25/2018 at 4:06 PM, LGA Link N train said: Well, all I can say is that the Rehabilitation of Sea beach and Culver is necessary. Wanna what's even more necessary, the Nassau Street corridor Well, here's an updated ESI (not really) Bowery Canal Street Chambers Street 14 Street-6 Ave 47-50 Streets-Rockfeller Center Court Square 21 Street Northern Blvd 63 Drive 67 Avenue Forest Hills - 71 Avenue York street 34 Street Penn Station and Queensboro Plaza Astoria Blvd Those are stations that I think NEED the ESI program that I can think of for now cause this list can keep going on forever. Note that I have never been to the Bronx so I couldn't list any stations from there Northern Blvd and 67 ave are actually on the ESI list already. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LGA Link N Train Posted February 16, 2018 Share #294 Posted February 16, 2018 37 minutes ago, itmaybeokay said: Northern Blvd and 67 ave are actually on the ESI list already. I know that. That's why I kept them in this list. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
darkstar8983 Posted February 19, 2018 Share #295 Posted February 19, 2018 On 2/16/2018 at 2:25 PM, LGA Link N train said: I know that. That's why I kept them in this list. Also, Astoria Blvd (even though its not on the ESI list) is planned to get a renovation (and elevators) 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LGA Link N Train Posted February 19, 2018 Share #296 Posted February 19, 2018 11 minutes ago, darkstar8983 said: Also, Astoria Blvd (even though its not on the ESI list) is planned to get a renovation (and elevators) i foresaw that in a dream once 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
darkstar8983 Posted February 19, 2018 Share #297 Posted February 19, 2018 16 minutes ago, LGA Link N train said: i foresaw that in a dream once hmmm. could that be the same dream in which all subway lines are 100% on time and maintenance is actually performed efficiently? thought there was an article stating this out there 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Union Tpke Posted February 20, 2018 Share #298 Posted February 20, 2018 NEW YORK (WABC) -- There is a commuter alert for subway riders who rely on the B and C train lines. The MTA says the B and C will close at three stations in Manhattan beginning in April for renovation work. The line will close at 72nd Street, 86th Street and 110th Street. The MTA says the renovations could take up to six months but are necessary changes. In a statement, the MTA said: "This is a program that allows us to do essential work to preserve these stations for the next generation. This will allow us to get in and get out, doing work quickly over the course of months instead of years." http://abc7ny.com/traffic/3-manhattan-subway-stations-to-close-in-april-for-renovation-work/3110242/ 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CenSin Posted February 20, 2018 Share #299 Posted February 20, 2018 2 hours ago, Union Tpke said: NEW YORK (WABC) -- There is a commuter alert for subway riders who rely on the B and C train lines. The MTA says the B and C will close at three stations in Manhattan beginning in April for renovation work. The line will close at 72nd Street, 86th Street and 110th Street. The MTA says the renovations could take up to six months but are necessary changes. In a statement, the MTA said: "This is a program that allows us to do essential work to preserve these stations for the next generation. This will allow us to get in and get out, doing work quickly over the course of months instead of years." http://abc7ny.com/traffic/3-manhattan-subway-stations-to-close-in-april-for-renovation-work/3110242/ Maybe they should reopen the station entrances at 61 Street and 104 Street first to ease the pain of having to walk extra? 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deucey Posted February 23, 2018 Share #300 Posted February 23, 2018 MTA board: “Alright, FINE Andrew!!! Put your lipsticks on pigs.” The City’s board members voted no. http://www.nydailynews.com/new-york/mta-votes-cuomo-1b-plan-pretty-subway-stations-article-1.3836591 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.