Second Avenue Subway Discussion

[Lance]

It's called an estimate guys. I'm sure the MTA and the state will try to bring the costs down in the negotiation process. Whether they are successful will be seen. While I hope that exorbitant number is brought down, I also do not want to see lowest bid because that usually costs more in the long run.

 

However, many of you are correct in that the work involved with both the Metro-North and subway stations at 125th Street will increase the costs of the project significantly. The Lexington Ave station is already three levels below ground and Second Ave is slated to run underneath all that. Combine that with the underpinning involved for both stations and the various utilities under both 2nd Avenue and 125 Street and this becomes a more expensive project.

[bobtehpanda]

It's called an estimate guys. I'm sure the MTA and the state will try to bring the costs down in the negotiation process. Whether they are successful will be seen. While I hope that exorbitant number is brought down, I also do not want to see lowest bid because that usually costs more in the long run.

 

With the history of numbers only ever going up (Gateway from $10, to $15, and now $20B, for instance, not to mention SAS Phase I's cost escalations) the future does not bode well.

 

If the $6B is mostly from the stations, perhaps the MTA should stop building stations with unnecessary full mezzanines, and go for pocket entrances like DC Metro or the Tube.

[Dj Hammers]

Isn't the supposed to go up there during rush periods? Will any sign mention that?

In the AM rush, Ns will run up to 96 st, signed as Qs via Sea Beach to 96 st.

 

In the PMs, they'll return south in service 96 st, signed as Ns.

[Union Tpke]

In the AM rush, Ns will run up to 96 st, signed as Qs via Sea Beach to 96 st.

 

In the PMs, they'll return south in service 96 st, signed as Ns.

 

Why would they be signed as Qs?

[cl94]

Why would they be signed as Qs?

 

Less confusing than having 2 northern termini for the .

[RailRunRob]

Which, as we know, would require a big dip and resurfacing, without any benefit whatsoever. Wasteful is the right word indeed: of time, money, and labor. It's only a shame that they don't plan on using the Chinatown tunnels (at least not for trains), but apparently it's a routing issue in that particular case. What was the original destination that called for those tunnels?

Wasn't the tunnel section from 110th-120th streets built to a three-track spec? 

Edited December 18, 2016 by RailRunRob

[Mysterious2train]

Less confusing than having 2 northern termini for the .

 

Meh. I don't imagine the MTA is going to go and change the 179th trains to trains via 8th Av, or the Utica Av trains to trains via White Plains Road.... so doing this just seems awfully weird. 

Edited December 18, 2016 by Mysterious2train

[cl94]

Wasn't the tunnel section from 110th-120th streets built to a three-track spec? 

 

I think so. Would certainly make a logical spot for a future layup.

 

Meh. I don't imagine the MTA is going to go and change the 179th trains to trains via 8th Av, or the Utica Av trains to trains via White Plains Road.... so doing this just seems awfully weird. 

 

Different scenario here. The (E)s run express all the way to 179th, making it a different service from the , plus it runs a mere 5 blocks away. The (5)s essentially short-turn. An to 96th would skip 10 normal stops and end up in a different borough with no easy way to get to the other.

[Union Tpke]

I think so. Would certainly make a logical spot for a future layup.

 

 

Different scenario here. The (E)s run express all the way to 179th, making it a different service from the , plus it runs a mere 5 blocks away. The (5)s essentially short-turn. An to 96th would skip 10 normal stops and end up in a different borough with no easy way to get to the other.

 

But then you would have the on the Fourth Avenue Line away from the Brighton Line.

[CTK246]

Less confusing than having 2 northern termini for the .

But the having three southern termini is a-okay, at least to the MTA.

[MTA Bus]

In the AM rush, Ns will run up to 96 st, signed as Qs via Sea Beach to 96 st.

 

In the PMs, they'll return south in service 96 st, signed as Ns.

That makes no sense. Just make a program for N to 96th St.

 

Sent from my LG-H811 using Tapatalk

[Around the Horn]

Meh. I don't imagine the MTA is going to go and change the 179th trains to trains via 8th Av, or the Utica Av trains to trains via White Plains Road.... so doing this just seems awfully weird. 

 

 

But then you would have the on the Fourth Avenue Line away from the Brighton Line.

Exactly. I see no reason to call them trains...

[Wallyhorse]

It's called an estimate guys. I'm sure the MTA and the state will try to bring the costs down in the negotiation process. Whether they are successful will be seen. While I hope that exorbitant number is brought down, I also do not want to see lowest bid because that usually costs more in the long run.

 

However, many of you are correct in that the work involved with both the Metro-North and subway stations at 125th Street will increase the costs of the project significantly. The Lexington Ave station is already three levels below ground and Second Ave is slated to run underneath all that. Combine that with the underpinning involved for both stations and the various utilities under both 2nd Avenue and 125 Street and this becomes a more expensive project.

Which is one argument for making that last segment of Phase 2 elevated if it can be done much cheaper (with provisions to eventually run to 125th/Broadway).  No underpinning would be necessary if you can have such a portal wherever the existing tunnel on the SAS ends.  

 

Of course, that would lead to political fights, but if it proves to make it less costly, then I think it would have to be considered even if it were unlikely to ever actually happen.  

[CenSin]

Of course, that would lead to political fights, but if it proves to make it less costly, then I think it would have to be considered even if it were unlikely to ever actually happen.  

The MTA considers all options even ridiculous ones. That’s why their proposal documents have things that even you can’t dream of.

Exactly. I see no reason to call them trains...

…as they are neither trains nor trains.

[T to Dyre Avenue]

Less confusing than having 2 northern termini for the .

Interesting. I guess it would be similar to the unadvertised trains that go to New Lots and the unadvertised trains that go to Utica. Except in those cases, it's in the reverse-peak direction

[Around the Horn]

The MTA considers all options even ridiculous ones. That’s why their proposal documents have things that even you can’t dream of.

 

…as they are neither trains nor trains.

How are they not trains? They run on the to 57th Street and then via the to the nearest layup point, 96th Street.

[bstar1]

So riders will not get confused to Astoria and "to 96 St via 2 Av Line".

[GojiMet86]

It's easier for people to digest a Q train heading to Manhattan, because all Sea Beach trains head there anyway, but it's more annoying for people to be told that their N is going to 2nd Avenue. I see it all the time with the 57th Street N train. Almost everyone assumes they go to Astoria, but when they hear its not, then its an inconvinience. Its a bigger hassle when its the R68, as it happened about two wweks ago. The R160 do a better job because the announcements are very loud, but people can tune them out. Because for regular passengers, they assume its just a regular N. Theres no other reason for them to think otherwise.

[Tonyboy515]

How is the SAS going to open on December 30/31 if there are no notices posted up at any stations, and they still haven't confirmed a date?

 

 

Sent from my iPad using NYC Transit Forums mobile app

[Dj Hammers]

It's easier for people to digest a Q train heading to Manhattan, because all Sea Beach trains head there anyway, but it's more annoying for people to be told that their N is going to 2nd Avenue. I see it all the time with the 57th Street N train. Almost everyone assumes they go to Astoria, but when they hear its not, then its an inconvinience. Its a bigger hassle when its the R68, as it happened about two wweks ago. The R160 do a better job because the announcements are very loud, but people can tune them out. Because for regular passengers, they assume its just a regular N. Theres no other reason for them to think otherwise.

exactly. This is the reasoning, which has been proven in studies I might add Edited December 18, 2016 by Dj Hammers

[NewFlyer 230]

I could definitely see the going up to 96th too if the Queens Blvd Line is suffering from signal delays and construction. Personally I think they should labels all the Broadway lines as "Eastside 96st" and via the Q line if it's the and . People are always going to confused and they will just have to deal with it. They should pay more attention and try to learn about the transit system they use everyday.

[Mysterious2train]

I think so. Would certainly make a logical spot for a future layup.

 

 

Different scenario here. The (E)s run express all the way to 179th, making it a different service from the , plus it runs a mere 5 blocks away. The (5)s essentially short-turn. An to 96th would skip 10 normal stops and end up in a different borough with no easy way to get to the other.

 

What about the ? Lefferts Blvd and the Rockaways are in the same borough, but they're not exactly close together.

 

Don't get me wrong, I totally understand the reasoning for labeling these trips as , but it's inconsistent. I'm wondering, why start this now, when....

 

the having three southern termini is a-okay, at least to the MTA.

Edited December 18, 2016 by Mysterious2train

[Union Tpke]

exactly. This is the reasoning, which has been proven in studies I might add

 

So the trains are Ns in the timetable, but signed as Qs?

[Snowblock]

Sounds similar to the plan this summer where 2 trains will run via the Lex line to Flatbush due to the Clark tube closed, but be called 5 trains.

[Union Tpke]

Someone on the holiday train told me that a 10-car train of R160s has been wrapped for the Second Avenue Subway and is it Coney Island Yard. Presumably, this will be the first train.

I have heard from someone who talked to someone from the MTA and they said that the line would open at midnight.