Jump to content

Is overcrowding on Lexington Av and Canarsie lines overhyped?


JubaionBx12+SBS

Recommended Posts


  • Replies 133
  • Created
  • Last Reply
Asking if the Lex and Canarsie lines are over crowded is like asking if a bear s**ts in the woods. People complain because it's a real problem and the SAS (as currently planned) won't help the Lex riders.

 

It'll help some, but the majority of riders will stick with the (4)(5)(6). I however will be taking whatever train(s) they send up Second Avenue if (yes, if - not when) they complete it, assuming that headways are about 2-3 minutes. Get a seat to Times Square then the (2)(3) and walk. I'm sure that many of the other former express bus riders going to the World Financial Center will be doing the same, as well as commuters headed towards West or Central Midtown.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

THe SAS going up 3 stops is not going to make a dent in Lexington Av ridership. Yes, it will be very convenient for people east of 3rd Av to just walk to 2nd Av than all the way to Lexington, but the (Q) will 'zig zag' from west to east and people still needs to transfer by 14th or CH/BB if they want to get to Wall St and below.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I wouldn't say it's overhyped.... of course every train on a line aint goin be overcrowded....

But when you compare the crowding on the [lexington av lines & the (L)] to that of the rest of the lines in the system, yeah, it is that much higher....

 

...and that's why you hear all the "hype" (or w/e you wanna call it) regarding overcrowding on those 4 subway lines....

 

 

I ride the every weekday morning from roughly 7-8:10. I get on at 59th. It gets so crowded beforehand, that no one can get on after 59th until Fulton. There are always people waiting at 42nd, 14th, and Brooklyn Bridge, but they can never get on.

yep... I mean, the (4) out of Utica in the mornin.... man, if you aint on by Franklin, your chances of gettin a seat are very slim to none....

 

heading back towards brooklyn from manhattan, forget it.... if you board somewhere south of 42nd, prepare & expect to be standing all the way to like nevins (where the swap b/w the (3) & (4) usually happens)....

 

Tbh I think you're crazy. In 30 days you've gotten a seat TWICE at the station you got on at?? Maybe twice in 30 days I'll get a seat by 42nd or 14th, but I've never gotten a seat at my station, let alone anywhere north of 59th.

How does that make him crazy?

 

He's basically making the same general observation/conclusion you are...

Which is, trains on the Lex are that crowded.

 

Litterally 3 seconds after the doors opened at 14 St, the whole train was packed.

I was in the FIRST car.

yep, that's union square for ya... don't matter what car it is...

 

Over the years, I've learned that the hard way

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The SAS going up 3 stops is not going to make a dent in Lexington Av ridership. Yes, it will be very convenient for people east of 3rd Av to just walk to 2nd Av than all the way to Lexington, but the (Q) will 'zig zag' from west to east and people still needs to transfer by 14th or CH/BB if they want to get to Wall St and below.

 

Except that those on the (Q) can transfer to the (R) at 14th or (J) at Canal Street for lower Manhattan, so it should still help.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Except that those on the (Q) can transfer to the (R) at 14th or (J) at Canal Street for lower Manhattan, so it should still help.

 

Forcing people to transfer to access Lower Manhattan is already enough to deter them from it. It would also be a longer commute.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The (4) out of Utica, people purposely wait on the platform when the train right in front of them with standing room leaves, so they can sit on the next one. It is not the standing room is that bad, its that it becomes crushloaded by time it gets to Nevins and its now even uncomfortable to stand (and remains so until Union Sq), so they rather get there early and just wait for a seat. It was something I never saw before until I had to work Utica tower as a tower operator in the AMs. In the Bronx they just jam themselves onto the (6) like its a can of sardines.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Asking if the Lex and Canarsie lines are over crowded is like asking if a bear s**ts in the woods. People complain because it's a real problem and the SAS (as currently planned) won't help the Lex riders.

 

Well, it'll help a little bit. They probably won't have to wait for that many trains to pass by before they can get on.

 

I mean, the people transferring to go crosstown at 59th Street and 42nd Street would all take the (Q), especially if they lived east of 3rd Avenue. That should at least make the crowding more tolerable.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, it'll help a little bit. They probably won't have to wait for that many trains to pass by before they can get on.

 

I mean, the people transferring to go crosstown at 59th Street and 42nd Street would all take the (Q), especially if they lived east of 3rd Avenue. That should at least make the crowding more tolerable.

 

We won't have to let any trains pass by then, and maybe we might even get a seat.

 

I was just looking at the (N)(Q)(R) train timetables before, and even if they send both the (N)(Q), which currently have about 10 minute headways each, up 2nd Avenue, their current headways would need to compete with the (4)(5) which arrive in under 2 minutes from when the last one leaves. Second Avenue needs a train every 3 minutes at most. Anything longer than that and people will continue to use the (4)(5)(6) unless they're going to West Midtown.

 

Just estimating, but assuming that there are no delays, a (4) from 86th can get to 14th in about 10 minutes, making 3 stops, whereas a (Q) train from 86th will get to 14th in about 20 minutes, making 6 stops. The Second Avenue Subway isn't going to gain any ridership from commuters wanting Wall Street, but mainly those wanting West Midtown or anything North of the (1)(2)(3) trains.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We won't have to let any trains pass by then, and maybe we might even get a seat.

 

I was just looking at the (N)(Q)(R) train timetables before, and even if they send both the (N)(Q), which currently have about 10 minute headways each, up 2nd Avenue, their current headways would need to compete with the (4)(5) which arrive in under 2 minutes from when the last one leaves. Second Avenue needs a train every 3 minutes at most. Anything longer than that and people will continue to use the (4)(5)(6) unless they're going to West Midtown.

 

Just estimating, but assuming that there are no delays, a (4) from 86th can get to 14th in about 10 minutes, making 3 stops, whereas a (Q) train from 86th will get to 14th in about 20 minutes, making 6 stops. The Second Avenue Subway isn't going to gain any ridership from commuters wanting Wall Street, but mainly those wanting West Midtown or anything North of the (1)(2)(3) trains.

 

I totally agree with you on this, and just to add on, the second ave. subway will only help ease the crowds on the (4),(5), and (6) if the project gets the funding for its third and fourth phases. If the MTA gets the funding for the second ave. subway and the (T) is created then, and only then will the problems on the lexington ave. line subside. As of now there is no solution to the over-crowding problem on the lexington ave. line.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I totally agree with you on this, and just to add on; the second ave. subway will only help ease the crows on the (4),(5), and (6) if the project gets the funding for its third and fourth phases. If it the MTA gets the funding for the second ave. subway and the (T) is created then, and only then will the problems on the lexington ave. line subside. As of now there is no solution to the over-crowding problem on the lexington ave. line.

 

Sorry, but you lost me after you said "funding for its third and fourth phases." ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We won't have to let any trains pass by then, and maybe we might even get a seat.

 

I was just looking at the (N)(Q)(R) train timetables before, and even if they send both the (N)(Q), which currently have about 10 minute headways each, up 2nd Avenue, their current headways would need to compete with the (4)(5) which arrive in under 2 minutes from when the last one leaves. Second Avenue needs a train every 3 minutes at most. Anything longer than that and people will continue to use the (4)(5)(6) unless they're going to West Midtown.

 

Just estimating, but assuming that there are no delays, a (4) from 86th can get to 14th in about 10 minutes, making 3 stops, whereas a (Q) train from 86th will get to 14th in about 20 minutes, making 6 stops. The Second Avenue Subway isn't going to gain any ridership from commuters wanting Wall Street, but mainly those wanting West Midtown or anything North of the (1)(2)(3) trains.

 

Well, people still use the buses in the neighborhood even though they run less often than every 3 minutes.

 

And maybe you won't get a seat, but the fact that most West Side riders are taking the (Q) (and/or (N) if it gets sent there) instead of transferring will definitely mean less crowding. How much less is what we'll have to see.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

These are the only three groups of people 96st SAS will reduce...

 

1. The amount of people waiting to get on the (6) at 96/77/68sts to go south.

2. The amount of people waiting to get on the (4)(5)(6) at 86st to go south, and their destination is NOT an area that they must be on the (4)(5) to get to.

3. The amount of people waiting at 42nd/51st/59st to get on the (6) going north to areas 96st and below.

 

It will have no effect at all on trains coming into Manhattan (in the rush most are packed) and will have no effect on the (6) until it gets to 96st.

 

For those that say well the (4)(5) will get people to lower Manhattan quicker because it's a more direct run (and faster express), yes that is true. One has to remember the amount of travel to get to a subway station in the first place, and it has to be added to the total travel time. Its not travel time from subway station to subway station, its travel time from doorstep of dwelling to doorstep of destination. For those living on the east side of Third Avenue and on east to the river (96th and below) will have a shorter walk to SAS, and probably a one seat ride going south.

 

Back on topic, a more significant difference will be felt once (and if) it gets to 125st. So even though trains will still be packed coming into Manhattan (and people will always run for the (4)(5) across the platform), at least they won't be even more so as they continue south through Manhattan. That's why there's a bottleneck in the first place in the AM rush in the south Bronx, it takes so long to get out of 125st with all those people running across the platform to an already packed train lol.

 

This doesn't solve at all how to bring every train less packed into Manhattan (the Bronx people), but eventually it will help to resolve what to do with the people that live in Manhattan (which is what this city is all about sadly enough).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

These are the only three groups of people 96st SAS will reduce...

 

1. The amount of people waiting to get on the (6) at 96/77/68sts to go south.

2. The amount of people waiting to get on the (4)(5)(6) at 86st to go south, and their destination is NOT an area that they must be on the (4)(5) to get to.

3. The amount of people waiting at 42nd/51st/59st to get on the (6) going north to areas 96st and below.

 

It will have no effect at all on trains coming into Manhattan (in the rush most are packed) and will have no effect on the (6) until it gets to 96st.

 

For those that say well the (4)(5) will get people to lower Manhattan quicker because it's a more direct run (and faster express), yes that is true. One has to remember the amount of travel to get to a subway station in the first place, and it has to be added to the total travel time. Its not travel time from subway station to subway station, its travel time from doorstep of dwelling to doorstep of destination. For those living on the east side of Third Avenue and on east to the river (96th and below) will have a shorter walk to SAS, and probably a one seat ride going south.

 

Back on topic, a more significant difference will be felt once (and if) it gets to 125st. So even though trains will still be packed coming into Manhattan (and people will always run for the (4)(5) across the platform), at least they won't be even more so as they continue south through Manhattan. That's why there's a bottleneck in the first place in the AM rush in the south Bronx, it takes so long to get out of 125st with all those people running across the platform to an already packed train lol.

 

This doesn't solve at all how to bring every train less packed into Manhattan (the Bronx people), but eventually it will help to resolve what to do with the people that live in Manhattan (which is what this city is all about sadly enough).

 

The (Q) doesn't go to Lower Manhattan. The amount of time needed to switch transfer will be more than the amount of time needed to spend walking an extra 2 blocks to Lex.

 

Just a couple figures:

86th to Wall St:

(4)(5) - 6 stops

(Q) - 3 stops to 42nd, (2)(3) - 5 stops to Wall St

 

But the (Q) or whatever they send up, assuming the headways are 2-3 minutes at most, will help commuters on the West Side who need access to West 57th Street or anything along the (1)(2)(3).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Forcing people to transfer to access Lower Manhattan is already enough to deter them from it. It would also be a longer commute.

 

True, but nonetheless, it will take some people off the (4)/(5), especially those who work close enough to Canal Street who can simply take the (Q) to Canal Street.

 

This is also why if Phase 3 of the SAS does manage to get built, I would have it connect to the Nassau Street line, which would allow the (T) to go to Brooklyn and help take serious pressure off the (4)/(5) between Atlantic-Pacifc and 125th/Lex.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

(DUH!!!) Not every last person in the UES works in lower Manhattan. Some are west midtown types, others are downtown Brooklyn, and there's all those places in between.

 

Yes, but an overwhelming majority of Upper East Siders who take the subway are headed down to the Financial District. There are some who work in East Midtown (as in East of 5th Avenue), but not too many going to West Midtown. There are however quite a few who have to go to the West side of Downtown by Battery Park City, so it'll provide an alternative for them as well by giving them access to Times Square for a transfer to the (2)(3). And I'll be one of them.

 

True, but nonetheless, it will take some people off the (4)/(5), especially those who work close enough to Canal Street who can simply take the (Q) to Canal Street.

 

This is also why if Phase 3 of the SAS does manage to get built, I would have it connect to the Nassau Street line, which would allow the (T) to go to Brooklyn and help take serious pressure off the (4)/(5) between Atlantic-Pacifc and 125th/Lex.

 

Ok, seriously we all know that Phase 3 or 2 or whatever else will never get built, at least not in our lifetime. Yes of course connecting it to go somewhere in Brooklyn and continue outside of Manhattan would be great, but it just isn't going to happen.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The (4) out of Utica, people purposely wait on the platform when the train right in front of them with standing room leaves, so they can sit on the next one. It is not the standing room is that bad, its that it becomes crushloaded by time it gets to Nevins and its now even uncomfortable to stand (and remains so until Union Sq), so they rather get there early and just wait for a seat. It was something I never saw before until I had to work Utica tower as a tower operator in the AMs.

 

In the Bronx they just jam themselves onto the (6) like its a can of sardines.

yeh, at Utica, the 4 is frequent enough in the mornings where riders consider doing that.... still though, the standing room is bad enough... it's not on the level of flatbush av (for example), but it's not moderate either.... Those ppl. waiting for the next (4) to arrive so they can get a seat, is spillover (or w/e synonym you wanna use) from the train before it... the cycle repeats itself, and the amt. of ppl waiting increases when a (3) pulls into utica.....

 

If enough schoolkids don't get off at franklin (or worse, a 2 pulls into franklin the same time a 4 does), forget nevins, 4's are gonna be crushloaded @ franklin; where ppl. are all on top of each other.... either way, you may as well give up on gettin a seat if you left utica, standing........

 

Have it not be for the (3), you'd have a much worse situation (IMO) than what happens at flatbush (where you have ppl. sardining onto (2)'s & (5)'s in the morning) at utica w/ the (4)... I could only imagine the passenger distribution of 4's to 3's @ utica if it was a stub end terminal....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The (4) out of Utica, people purposely wait on the platform when the train right in front of them with standing room leaves, so they can sit on the next one. It is not the standing room is that bad, its that it becomes crushloaded by time it gets to Nevins and its now even uncomfortable to stand (and remains so until Union Sq), so they rather get there early and just wait for a seat. It was something I never saw before until I had to work Utica tower as a tower operator in the AMs.

 

In the Bronx they just jam themselves onto the (6) like its a can of sardines.

yeh, at Utica, the 4 is frequent enough in the mornings where riders consider doing that.... still though, the standing room is bad enough... it's not on the level of flatbush av (for example), but it's not moderate either.... Those ppl. waiting for the next (4) to arrive so they can get a seat, is spillover (or w/e synonym you wanna use) from the train before it... the cycle repeats itself, and the amt. of ppl waiting increases when a (3) pulls into utica.....

 

If enough schoolkids don't get off at franklin (or worse, a 2 pulls into franklin the same time a 4 does), forget nevins, 4's are gonna be crushloaded @ franklin; where ppl. are all on top of each other.... either way, you may as well give up on gettin a seat if you left utica, standing........

 

Have it not be for the (3), you'd have a much worse situation (IMO) than what happens at flatbush (where you have ppl. sardining onto (2)'s & (5)'s in the morning) at utica w/ the (4)... I could only imagine the passenger distribution of 4's to 3's @ utica if it was a stub end terminal....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.