1st Avenue Station

[checkmatechamp13 2,465]

Should there be a 1st Avenue station on the 53rd Street ((E)/(M) and 42nd Street ((7)/<7>) line. Obviously, the MTA is facing a budget deficit, but how feasable and worthwhile would it be as a future capital project?

 

The advantage would be that it would provide a direct connection to the 2nd Avenue Line at the 2 stations instead of having a very long passageway that also connects with the Lexington Avenue Line. The station on the 42nd Street Line would be even more useful, as it would serve the United Nations, and, combined with the extension to Javits Center, would really save the MTA money by not having to run as much M42 service.

 

So what does everybody think?

[IRTFlushing7 0]

In my opinion, opening a 42nd Street and 1st Avenue station will cause an elimination of the M42 (i think). For security reasons, I'm not so sure if a new train stop is good. With the (E)/(M), not a good idea either. Maybe in the near future.

Btw, first post as an user on this page :cool:

[CenSin 3,407]

Don't the lines slope sharply? Maybe a bit east of Grand Central there might be a possibility.

[EE Broadway Local 18]

On East 42d Street, there isn't much between First Avenue and the F.D.R., so I don't think a First Avenue station on the would be good plus the Flushing Line is entering the Steinway Tunnels at First Avenue.

 

On East 53d Street, there is slightly more between First Avenue and the F.D.R. with the start of Sutton Place South, but again, a First Avenue station on the might not be good.

 

Maybe a little bit better for a First Avenue station would be East 60th Street or East 63d Street where York Avenue is between First Avenue and the F.D.R..

 

Unfortunately, where Manhattan widens out for the first time since East 14th Street, the area where York and East End Avenues are between First Avenue and the F.D.R., there are only crosstown buses on East 79th and East 86th Streets.

 

First Avenue is good because of Avenues A, B, C, and D between First and the F.D.R..

[checkmatechamp13 2,465]

On East 42d Street, there isn't much between First Avenue and the F.D.R., so I don't think a First Avenue station on the would be good plus the Flushing Line is entering the Steinway Tunnels at First Avenue.

 

On East 53d Street, there is slightly more between First Avenue and the F.D.R. with the start of Sutton Place South, but again, a First Avenue station on the might not be good.

 

Maybe a little bit better for a First Avenue station would be East 60th Street or East 63d Street where York Avenue is between First Avenue and the F.D.R..

 

Unfortunately, where Manhattan widens out for the first time since East 14th Street, the area where York and East End Avenues are between First Avenue and the F.D.R., there are only crosstown buses on East 79th and East 86th Streets.

 

First Avenue is good because of Avenues A, B, C, and D between First and the F.D.R..

 

I was thinkingmore between 1st and 2nd Avenue for a convenient transfer to the T train.

[YankeesPwnMets 569]

Should there be a 1st Avenue station on the 53rd Street ((E)/(M) and 42nd Street ((7)/<7>) line. Obviously, the MTA is facing a budget deficit, but how feasable and worthwhile would it be as a future capital project?

 

 

 

So what does everybody think?

 

God damn, the projects, construction, new cars all are supported by the CAPITAL budget, not the OPERATIONS budget. The capital budget is funded by the federal government, the operations isn't. and if the doesn't spend the money they lose it. The operations budget is facing the money issue, not the capital so the budget isn't a real problem

[checkmatechamp13 2,465]

God damn, the projects, construction, new cars all are supported by the CAPITAL budget, not the OPERATIONS budget. The capital budget is funded by the federal government, the operations isn't. and if the doesn't spend the money they lose it. The operations budget is facing the money issue, not the capital so the budget isn't a real problem

 

So all they would have to do is ask the federal government for the money for the project?

[Kamen Rider 2,268]

Please, watch the Nazi Banksters Crimes Ripple Effect at http://jforjustice.co.uk/banksters

[Nova RTS 9147 79]

There's an exit at 3rd avenue and 42nd Street, thus making a 1st Avenue station kind of moot and redundant . Plus, a station at 1st and 42nd may present security issues with the UN being so close by.

 

1st and 53rd is simply impractical. The incline is too steep to allow something like that.

[FamousNYLover 578]

http://mta.info/capconstr/sas/pdf/2_Av_subway_7_10-5.pdf

55th St will connect to 51-53rd Sts/Lex Av and 42nd St will connect to Grand Central .

[YankeesPwnMets 569]

So all they would have to do is ask the federal government for the money for the project?

The government would need to approve the project first as well

[w8Hou 64]

No, its not worth the cost to build those stations. Just leave it alone.

[TwoTimer 762]

He's concerned about there being a two crosstown block distance between the and the Lex (one crosstown block distance between the T and stuff heading to queens as there is a 3Av exit at 60th and 53rd).

 

There are other ways to deal with the distance like high speed automatic walkways. And while the UN is a tourist site when empty, its not like diplomats take the subway to work there. Cant build a station just to have an opening across the street from the UN, terror threat or not. As someone said before, there's a diamond at 1Av anyway there.

 

Its like me asking TA to build new entrance/exits at 161-YS at the north end because the stadium is across the street from where it used to be.

[SubwayGuy 2,321]

God damn, the projects, construction, new cars all are supported by the CAPITAL budget, not the OPERATIONS budget. The capital budget is funded by the federal government, the operations isn't. and if the doesn't spend the money they lose it. The operations budget is facing the money issue, not the capital so the budget isn't a real problem

 

So all they would have to do is ask the federal government for the money for the project?

 

The Feds are broke too, in case you haven't noticed the US Gov't is several trillion dollars in debt. Now is no time to be spending more money. Passing the buck doesn't do anything, the buck needs to stop HERE and NOW with frivolous spending although I doubt it will...

 

Neither of those two locations is technically feasible nor provides the benefit to service that would justify constructing a station at either location. 42nd is highly residential and a subway stop would be unwelcomed, 53rd is mostly residential with some commercial but close enough to other options that an expensive and deep station is not needed.

[TOURQuarterback12 0]

Good suggestions but I think a 1 Ave stop would not work due to the tunnel straight ahead for the East River. If anything, 1 Av-United Nations would sound pretty good as a stop .

[Roadcruiser1 286]

Too bad the is broke though who knows maybe someone here could create a First Avenue Line on their fantasy map. Sometimes I do wonder what would happen if the had subway lines from First to Tenth Av in Manhattan. One thing for certain I know the won't be in the situation that it is now.

[Grand Concourse 2,690]

Why would there be a need for a 1st Av line? The MTA can't even get the SAS built.

[Roadcruiser1 286]

That is why I said its a fantasy and it might never come true.

[TOURQuarterback12 0]

He meant a 1 Av stop at 42 St, at 53rd, at 59th

[Roadcruiser1 286]

I know I was just saying that a First Avenue Line might be better but there is no money for it.

[Grand Concourse 2,690]

He meant a 1 Av stop at 42 St, at 53rd, at 59th

 

Even if those stops were built, you'd still need to build a corridor at least a block long to connect to the SAS. May as well just build the connections from the SAS to the existing stops and save on not having to build entire station complexes with their own corridors.

[checkmatechamp13 2,465]

I know I was just saying that a First Avenue Line might be better but there is no money for it.

 

Do you mean better than a Second Avenue Line? I guess it would serve more of the Lower East Side/East Village. The only problem is that that fewer people would use it on the Upper East Side. 3rd Avenue would be the dividing point between Lexington Avenue Line and Second Avenue Line territory. If it was a First Avenue Line, that would be more of an area where the people are closer to the Lexington Avenue Line.

[CenSin 3,407]

You'll notice that the only places where lines are just a block away from other lines is where they crisscross, are forced to converge to a narrow geographical region, or are in competition with other lines (before unification). The MTA will never build a 1 Avenue line—not even in my fantasies would there ever be a need for one unless two redundant lines aren't enough to shuttle the daily volumes of passengers.