Porter

The Canal Street and stations share a name verbatim yet lack a free transfer between them, although such a connection is currently at the top of my "reasonable wish-list." Basically, sharing identical names without free transfers is fairly unremarkable. Is that physically possible? Explain, please.

I was definitely in the first camp, but I'm slowly learning to live with the reality of the second. Had the third happened, I'd be down there day and night, rain or shine, demanding the first option. Well, the does let out right at the new Cortlandt Way, but I get your point. I agree that it would be better to just rename the station "World Trade Center–Church Street" and the as "World Trade Center–Greenwich Street," but there would probably be some resistance (because any change always has resistance, even those for the better). As far as tourists are concerned, the name "World Trade Center" is far more meaningful and helpful than Cortlandt, Church, Greenwich, Park Place, and Chambers combined; "World Trade Center" tells you precisely which corner of Lower Manhattan you're in. These names were minted before the first WTC was built, so I think it's high time to acknowledge the reality that the WTC is the main attraction of those stations. I'd even suggest "Fulton Street–World Trade Center," but that's a bit more of a stretch. No, but it would be possible to make such an arrangement to mirror the Lexington Avenue situation with the free out-of-system transfer. Possibility aside, why? The already meets with the two stations down at South Ferry/Whitehall, a relatively recent free transfer. To go between the and the , however, might be a benefit, but would such a southerly connection even be in demand? Maybe, but y'all would know better, so please tell me your thoughts.

Per the article I just posted, it will definitely have "World Trade Center" in the name; it's really a question of whether or not "Cortlandt [Street]" will be prepended. My opinion is that if they want to call the station simply "World Trade Center" with no extra baggage, then they should also drop the Cortlandt name from the BMT station for symmetry. Then you'll have WTC for (E), (1), and (R)(W)—a bit more unified. I'd personally prefer keeping the Cortlandt name all around for historical preservation, but let's not kid ourselves, the eponymous street is pretty irrelevant in this century, especially compared to the highly relevant WTC. It's funny, I actually thought that they'd go in the other direction and drop the "World Trade Center" suffix, keeping only "Cortlandt Street," since that's the only name that was grayed out in the maps and route listings. I feel both relieved and confused.

A peep, finally: https://nypost.com/2018/08/24/subway-station-destroyed-on-9-11-finally-ready-to-reopen/

https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2018/07/09/can-andy-byford-save-the-subways

If they could just manage to open it before the first snowfall, that would be great. I get that the elevator to street level next to the PAC won't be finished for a while, but the station is perfectly capable of operating without it. The two plaza staircases and mall portals are perfectly sufficient.

This is the only logical plan considering the 's budget. Build it like that, call it a day, and leave provisions for future expansions when the can afford it. 149th and 138th provide the most use for the lowest cost.

This might be the only underground station with the main ticketing 'mezzanine' a floor below the platform and tracks. Yes, there are platform-level portals, but the large main entrance and ticketing area (with access to both platforms) will be on the lower concourse level overlooking PATH Hall.

It's not. The writing on the wall is the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the Declaration of Independence, so not related to 9/11, just more borderline platitudes.

Let's make this real simple and cheap for the (at least comparatively speaking). Phase 2 (second and final phase): three new stations and two expanded stations: <MANHATTAN> (Second Avenue Line) 106th Street 116th Street 125th Street <BRONX> (Third Avenue Line) 138th Street 149th Street Yes, I understand that ending the project here would defeat the purpose of a true 'Second Avenue' subway line, which I do agree is needed, but given the 's financial and operational ineptitude and misfortunes, I think this is the best that can be achieved in the near future. A serious Second Avenue Subway with new and lines will have to come sometime later down the line, perhaps a few decades at this rate. Therefore, I think we should focus on what can be reasonably achieved, which I've outlined above, a plan that reasonably accommodates future extensions along 125th Street in Manhattan and Third Avenue in the Bronx, not to mention further south along Second Avenue in Manhattan. Since the can barely keep the existing infrastructure together, it should really just aim for a more reasonable goal like this one.

I mean, it's a shit rendering, but use your imagination, and then compare what you imagine to the '70s look of the previous station.

Not that bland: https://www.nytimes.com/2015/04/30/nyregion/at-cortlandt-street-subway-station-art-woven-from-words.html

Oops, I was imagining a different station's walls. The bricks weren't red-orange (the columns were, though)—they were a kind of beige-brown, but certainly not white either. Ugly and unremarkable just the same, though.

The previous station was in a postwar red-orange brick style—ugly and unremarkable. The only artwork I remember it having was a triptych of the twins and the surrounding neighborhood, which was ultimately crossed out in red spray paint and tossed like its adjacent advertisements. The original station had beautiful mosaics that were relocated to some museum after the WTC began construction; it would have been nice to see them finally return.

Yes, without hesitation. 16 pinned threads and 9 unpinned threads on the first page? Come on now...

Is it just me, or does this forum have way too many pinned threads?

Granting commuters direct access to WTC PATH, offices, and shopping malls is well worth maybe making South Ferry commuters late by an extra minute or two. The new South Ferry Station has made the commute far more reliable and frequent, at least. If any stations were to be cut to save time to the ferry, I'd cut both and Rector Street stations, since they're both so close to their Cortlandt Street counterparts, both of which being far more important stations. I'm sure anyone who is accustomed to using either Rector Street station wouldn't be too inconvenienced by getting on or off earlier at Cortlandt Street.

So do most of these names indeed originate from native New Yorkers looking to make a buck on transplants?

Prepare to have your world turned upside-down: Luis Vazquez-Willhelm, a Financial District real estate agent who celebrated America's Bicentennial in the neighborhood as a child and lived in the very first apartment complex built in BPC overlooking the WFC construction site and recently built WTC, runs a popular Facebook page called 'FiDi Fan Page', where he trumps up all the new additions and changes to the district, celebrating it as the hottest new residential destination. If he's not a native New Yorker, then who is? I admit I've only lived here a little over ten years so far.

Virtually dead? The seamlessly integrated powerhouse trio of the WTC, WFC, and Fulton Center are very much alive on the weekends and every night of the week, which I'm sure having twelve lines and two PATH lines encourages, not to mention ferry service. Oh, and then there's the ever-expanding Pace University. Beyond that, there's the very popular Seaport sub-district which always has tourists unless the weather makes it undesirable. Like I said, people's perceptions of the Financial District are stuck in the past. It's not my favorite term, but it just rolls off the tongue more smoothly than 'Financial District'. Downtown Manhattan, Lower Manhattan, etc, are far too general and include more neighborhoods than just the Financial District, itself having several sub-neighborhoods like the Seaport, Wall Street, and WTC. I'm talking specifically about the area bound by the Brooklyn Bridge and Murray Street to the north, BPC to the west, and water to the south and east. However, I often include BPC implicitly when I talk about 'FiDi', a term that helps set it apart from its pre-residential-heyday before Y2K. In fact, having a name like 'FiDi' at all strongly implies a residential direction, as it was taught to me by a prominent Lower Manhattan Real Estate firm. The Financial District is for working—FiDi is for living and playing.

Are you being serious right now? Oh, so there are, like me. Yes, I can and do take the . People's perceptions of FiDi (including BPC) are stuck in the 20th Century. It's practically half residential now.

Why were trains running on a Saturday?

Hire non-union contractors. I won't protest if you won't...

I just saw a YouTube advert for www.subwayscam.com. What does everyone think of this? They make a pretty damning condemnation of the for all YouTubers to see. It must really be getting bad!

Would it kill them to open up the other Hudson Yards portal already? I walked by for the first time in what feels like years and, holy cow, the neighborhood is completely unrecognizable compared to what it looked like when I moved to NYC in 2008. I'd dare to say that it's an entirely new neighborhood, comprising Manhattan West, Hudson Yards, the new High Line, and the soon-to-be-new-again Javits Center. Will the really be able to handle all that traffic? Seriously... I was surprised that some old 20th Century auto-mechanics were still around and in business up on the northern border of the site. It's such a strange juxtaposition, all that urban rot next to gleaming new structures.