Second Avenue Subway Discussion

[Wallyhorse]

Where do you see the alleviation what I'm I missing?  What's the major difference between Lexington -125 and extending to the Bronx?  You're connecting to the same lines at 125th. Shy of the but if I'm going to Midtown West I can get there with a one-seat ride for the most part already.

 

How's is the solving overcrowding? It doesn't duplicate the Lex. Sure some people could benefit but reroute the floodgates think that's reaching a bit. Without phases 3 and 4 I don't see it. What are you basing your statement on I could be wrong but I'm always open for new information.

One thing about having the SAS go all the way across 125th to Broadway is you would connect to:

 

The at Lenox Avenue

The at St. Nicholas Avenue

The at Broadway (and by then, possibly a new Metro-North station).

 

Columbia's expansion alone as noted many times is why I would go across 125. 

 

As for the Bronx, you could accomplish some of what has been suggested as I have suggested before by extending the to the Bronx via a new Bridge between Queens and The Bronx (with a new stop in Queens added past Ditmars at 20th Avenue) with the line going underground after Food Service Drive (which would be the first stop in The Bronx), connecting to the at East 180 and the at Elder/Westchester Avenue.  This also would give Bronx riders looking for Queens a new option that does NOT make them go through Manhattan. 

[Caelestor]

One thing about having the SAS go all the way across 125th to Broadway is you would connect to:

 

The at Lenox Avenue

The at St. Nicholas Avenue

The at Broadway (and by then, possibly a new Metro-North station).

 

Columbia's expansion alone as noted many times is why I would go across 125. 

 

As for the Bronx, you could accomplish some of what has been suggested as I have suggested before by extending the to the Bronx via a new Bridge between Queens and The Bronx (with a new stop in Queens added past Ditmars at 20th Avenue) with the line going underground after Food Service Drive (which would be the first stop in The Bronx), connecting to the at East 180 and the at Elder/Westchester Avenue.  This also would give Bronx riders looking for Queens a new option that does NOT make them go through Manhattan. 

 

The 125 St Crosstown would achieve the following:

• Permanent traffic reduction on 125 St by redirecting most bus ridership underground
• Easier East Side and Bronx access to City College and Columbia (both campuses)
• Easier UES and Midtown East access from Upper Manhattan

It won't do one important thing, though:

• Alleviate overcrowding on the ,

which is what an extension to 3 Ave - 149 St would probably do. Again, what gets built depends on the priorities of those in power. If Columbia really really wanted to build a subway to its campus, it probably has enough clout to do so.

 

The Bronx extension is never going to happen. For less money, I'd send it east to Laguardia if the NIMBYs change their minds.

[RailRunRob]

Interesting. Do you by any chance know what an acceptable platform width is under ADA rules?

 

That's the only thing I can think of that would prevent 116th Street's platform from being built in the middle trackway...

Should be in here somewhere these are the guidelines. I'll dig as well.

 

https://www.transit.dot.gov/sites/fta.dot.gov/files/docs/Final_FTA_ADA_Circular_C_4710.1.pdf

http://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/text-idx?c=ecfr&rgn=div5&view=text&node=49:1.0.1.1.28&idno=49#sp49.1.38.c

[bobtehpanda]

Interesting. Do you by any chance know what an acceptable platform width is under ADA rules?

 

That's the only thing I can think of that would prevent 116th Street's platform from being built in the middle trackway...

 

That platform would be so narrow that ingress/egress from the platforms would end up being a major constraint on station capacity. People have to walk around the elevator, stairwells, and escalators, and a BMT train is only ten feet wide. Generously assuming a foot of clearance on each side, that means the middle portion is twelve feet wide, which is standard sidewalk width in the City. That's not a lot of room at all.

[bobtehpanda]

Okay, so I have a train that's stopping for me but not going where I need to go? So you're going to base the value of a $4.5 Billion dollar 2-mile extension on what? bus riders in one neighborhood doing what? Saturday chores! You said you didn't have the data and MTA didn't go in-depth so let's get out of our emotions for a second and take a step back. If were lucky at best we'll get phase 1 and 2 and now with a $6 billion dollar price tag to Harlem, it's a possibility this is all she wrote.  If it doesn't help the almost 600K people coming in from the Bronx doesn't help to alleviate the tons of people coming onto the line at Grand Central okay maybe it removes a few bodies of the nothing off the or and then you can't tell if the majority financial crowd of the UES can even use this thing to get to there place of business and if they can it's a two-seat ride. All I'm saying is stop selling this as a saving grace when we start building Phase 2 and get money in place for phase 3 then let's talk. I'm sure the people of UES will welcome the line who wouldn't show me the numbers.

How many people are taking the Bus beyond 63rd or 125th? Are you saying they don't want to or don't have the options? Are you telling me people aren't taking the on the uptown downtown corridor?  The along with the may help south of 14th. All the pieces have to line up for the SAS to hit the mark can't be half a**ed

 

Are you just assuming that people don't go one or two stops on the train as it is? A small percentage of people off the Lex is the ridership of an entire subway system somewhere else in the country.

 

No one is saying that the Lex is going to be just dandy and everyone will have a seat with legroom during the rush once the SAS is open. The Lex will still be full, just less full, which is still much better than the present situation. There was no money to build any faster, and there still isn't any money to build any faster.

 

All this talk of no in-depth numbers is nonsense. There are no in-depth numbers because it's impossible to predict human behavior to that level of certainty. All the MTA's modeling did was predict how many people would ride the , because that's all they were required to do. Presumably if the feds, who unlike us behind a website have the means to actually test this data, scored this project very highly and gave it lots of money, the model is probably not wrong. It's not as if FTA is trying to hand out billions to any idiot with a half-baked plan.

The 125 St Crosstown would achieve the following:

• Permanent traffic reduction on 125 St by redirecting most bus ridership underground
• Easier East Side and Bronx access to City College and Columbia (both campuses)
• Easier UES and Midtown East access from Upper Manhattan

 

The 1st one is probably not actually likely. A good number of the people taking buses across 125th are going to places other than 125th (like the M60 or Bx15) and so are not likely to switch. It also doesn't help that SAS stations across 125th would have to be deeper than the north-south stations, so it would end up taking more time to swipe in, get to platform level, take a train and get up to the street, rather than just taking the bus. Very few people take the to go across 42nd St, for instance.

[Trainmaster5]

I guess my major disconnection is no one's is saying where riders are actually going once they reach Manhattan. That's my question.

In my mind, it's just shifting weight or flow.  One water pipe splits to four pipes but then further down the line those four pipes combine to make a single pipe again with the same amount of water. In essence, you're playing with bandwidth but you're not creating any additional.   Are we saying people aren't going find their way back to the Lex once in Manhattan?  What's the matrix? Are People traveling to Midtown? If so what're the numbers? 45% 30% what are the transfer points. 59th-Lex, 51-Lex?.  I haven't had anyone present that data  I haven't found anything major ether if you know where to find it let me know.  Haven't seen the design for 125th do you feel it's not sufficient for transfers?

You're actually asking the right question but it seems that almost everyone is taking it from a different starting point. A while back I tried to point out the bogus justification for the 125th St-Lexington Ave-Metro-North connection in the first place. It was done for political reasons pure and simple. In order to get a majority of the board's approval this so-called MN sop was thrown into the mix. There is no certified rail planner alive that would sign off on this plan as an astute financial or travel plan. The original plan for this go round of the SAS envisioned replacing the Second (and Third) Avenue Els with a path down the East side of Manhattan. The loss of those Els was the biggest contributor to the overcrowding of the Lexington , , and especially the . Instead of three pipelines from the Bronx everything was forced onto the Lex trains. This forced the UES Yorkville residents onto trains that were already crowded before those trains even entered Manhattan. It's not rocket science to see that Phase 1 should have included a route due north to 125th St-2nd Avenue with Phase 2 going due North across the river into the Bronx. This would at least give you two pipelines heading north and south on the East Side. The obvious question to ask is where are the UES residents heading to after this Phase 1 opens. Forget what the pie in the sky projections were back when any SAS was proposed. RTO Operations and Planning and most urban planners say that Midtown East and the Financial District, followed by Midtown West will be the preferred destinations. Follow me carefully now. The , , and lines cover much of that ground. A starting in the Bronx would cover some of that population's destination and relieve the Lex somewhat, while the soon to open segment does even less. Forget the MNRR 125th St dream. Why would anyone leave the railroad at that station unless that was close to their final destination? The next stop on MNRR is Grand Central Terminal, 1 stop, a straight shot. IMO only a railfan, under the influence of something besides common sense, would suggest a commuter would disembark a train for a subway trip south. That's even if their destination was Midtown West or Chelsea. Finally we have the 125th St Crosstown hopefuls. I pointed out before that a private entity, the IRT, the City of New York with the IND ,the Board of Transportation, and the NYCTA never proposed a crosstown link via rail. Where's the potential ridership base located? If one is located near the , Columbia, or CCNY there's nothing stopping that person from traveling to East Harlem. It's called a bus, a cab, Uber. How many surface lines traverse 116th, 125th, 135th and 145th streets from West to East? How many riders? We should really dig up a street and lay rails for whom? As for the potential re-routes. IMO your money would be better spent connecting the at New Lots to the Bay Ridge Branch of the LIRR or the LIRR Rockaway Beach Branch back to or alongside the to Howard Beach. Just my opinion though. Carry on.

[Porter]

If only something grandiose and important could be built at (or near) the intersection of Third Avenue and 149th Street, the developer could push for the extension...

[RailRunRob]

Are you just assuming that people don't go one or two stops on the train as it is? A small percentage of people off the Lex is the ridership of an entire subway system somewhere else in the country.

 

No one is saying that the Lex is going to be just dandy and everyone will have a seat with legroom during the rush once the SAS is open. The Lex will still be full, just less full, which is still much better than the present situation. There was no money to build any faster, and there still isn't any money to build any faster.

 

All this talk of no in-depth numbers is nonsense. There are no in-depth numbers because it's impossible to predict human behavior to that level of certainty. All the MTA's modeling did was predict how many people would ride the , because that's all they were required to do. Presumably if the feds, who unlike us behind a website have the means to actually test this data, scored this project very highly and gave it lots of money, the model is probably not wrong. It's not as if FTA is trying to hand out billions to any idiot with a half-baked plan.

 

I get it more than you understand there's no other City like New York in this country not many places you can build in Manhattan and not hit the bullseye the SAS is no different. Read my post's I've said many times you can't predict what people are going to do I had a paragraph on human behavior being a person currently working in UX I understand you don't know until it's out there and you pivot. In fact, my responses that brought us to this point were based on comments made with certainty. And I question them as any inquiring mind should. If you telling someone something you should be able to cite the source. I'm asking myself is this person just reading something or repeating what they herd or do they really have an understanding of the topic. Number's are the only thing I know that doesn't contain too much of a person's bias myself included Why and how are the questions ! My point is none of us really know. Asking if anyone has seen a rider matrix seems pretty standard if folks are saying riders are going to jump on this new line. If your not 100% or at least 99.98% certain than say that never do I post and not say I could be mistaken or admit if I'm wrong there always something new to learn. I'm thinking folks have data and know something and have done their due diligence this is the world I come from. So maybe it's on me for expecting that much. Ultimately my intro into this convo was around the fact I felt this was overhyped mainly because I feel people think its more than what it is. And prob to no fault of the MTA.  That's my feel on it everything after that is response and reaction. Time will be the ultimate judge it'll go through it's due process.

[RailRunRob]

You're actually asking the right question but it seems that almost everyone is taking it from a different starting point. A while back I tried to point out the bogus justification for the 125th St-Lexington Ave-Metro-North connection in the first place. It was done for political reasons pure and simple. In order to get a majority of the board's approval this so-called MN sop was thrown into the mix. There is no certified rail planner alive that would sign off on this plan as an astute financial or travel plan. The original plan for this go round of the SAS envisioned replacing the Second (and Third) Avenue Els with a path down the East side of Manhattan. The loss of those Els was the biggest contributor to the overcrowding of the Lexington , , and especially the . Instead of three pipelines from the Bronx everything was forced onto the Lex trains. This forced the UES Yorkville residents onto trains that were already crowded before those trains even entered Manhattan. It's not rocket science to see that Phase 1 should have included a route due north to 125th St-2nd Avenue with Phase 2 going due North across the river into the Bronx. This would at least give you two pipelines heading north and south on the East Side. The obvious question to ask is where are the UES residents heading to after this Phase 1 opens. Forget what the pie in the sky projections were back when any SAS was proposed. RTO Operations and Planning and most urban planners say that Midtown East and the Financial District, followed by Midtown West will be the preferred destinations. Follow me carefully now. The , , and lines cover much of that ground. A starting in the Bronx would cover some of that population's destination and relieve the Lex somewhat, while the soon to open segment does even less. Forget the MNRR 125th St dream. Why would anyone leave the railroad at that station unless that was close to their final destination? The next stop on MNRR is Grand Central Terminal, 1 stop, a straight shot. IMO only a railfan, under the influence of something besides common sense, would suggest a commuter would disembark a train for a subway trip south. That's even if their destination was Midtown West or Chelsea. Finally we have the 125th St Crosstown hopefuls. I pointed out before that a private entity, the IRT, the City of New York with the IND ,the Board of Transportation, and the NYCTA never proposed a crosstown link via rail. Where's the potential ridership base located? If one is located near the , Columbia, or CCNY there's nothing stopping that person from traveling to East Harlem. It's called a bus, a cab, Uber. How many surface lines traverse 116th, 125th, 135th and 145th streets from West to East? How many riders? We should really dig up a street and lay rails for whom? As for the potential re-routes. IMO your money would be better spent connecting the at New Lots to the Bay Ridge Branch of the LIRR or the LIRR Rockaway Beach Branch back to or alongside the to Howard Beach. Just my opinion though. Carry on.

A very insightful opinion at that. Wisdom is a powerful and steady asset I needed that. I couldn't understand what I was missing in this thread I just wasn't getting the variables couldn't visualize the scenarios couldn't get to the sum of where riders were going I wondered if I was overthinking. I know I'm not crazy at least much appreciated for that. People process and apply information differently, just something you always have to factor in not to anyone's fault.

[JubaionBx12+SBS]

1. The problem I have a 2nd Avenue subway and with most of the MTA's transit planning in general is that it's not looking at solving the crowding issues from the source. One problem is that faulty ridership stats give the impression that overcrowding is only the result of intense demand from stops close to the peak load point which on the and lines couldn't be further from the truth. As someone who has used the 125th station on countless occasions over the years (mainly to xfer between the and trains) I can tell you that trains generally enter 125 rather crowded during AM Rush and half the train dumps at 125 for the xfer. Not once making that transfer did I think to myself that I would get a seat on the express since Bronx ridership is low. In fact 99% of the time the train whether or was almost full already. Which goes to show that the Bronx ridership alone creates overcrowding on these lines. But have the MTA tell it to you it's the 35,000 boarding at 125 and the 65,000 boarding at 86 which are causing the problems. If anything they just add to the problems but are in no way, shape or form the source of them. The source is without a doubt the Bronx. Each of the , and are pulling six figure totals from the Bronx into Manhattan with hardly any turnover in the Bronx on either line. The station by station ridership totals give a distorted picture as compared to what actually goes on with the Lexington Av Line.

 

2. Another source of Lex ridership that the Second Avenue Subway does nothing for are the folks transferring from Queens for East Side subway service.  Last time I checked, the crowds that disembark packed trains at 53rd-Lex and disembark packed and at 59th-Lex aren't doing so for the heck of it. Also, last time I checked hardly any of these people are commuting from residential enclaves in Queens to the residential Far East Side during peak work commute hours. Numerically speaking this riderbase (based on transfer estimates) is just as high as the inbound/outbound peak Bronx demand. 

 

3. So far we've seen billions of dollars spent on a subway extension that a) does not relieve the source of crowding on the line that motivates it's existence and b) does not pull xfer demand away from the meccas that are 59th and 51st. So in other words, initial return on investment is close to zero unless....

4. This is a long con to cut service on the Lexington Av line which will have long term cost saving benefits (although at the expense of Bronx commuters). The MTA can easily point to the individual station counts in the Bronx and the boarding losses within the UES and make the case (although a terrible one) that less and trains are needed. Given that the SAS will not see greater service levels then are being provided to the existing line the loss of trains on a lengthy route like Lexington is easily preferred if it can be made up for with a slight extension of an existing low to mid frequency route. Given the cut happy nature of the MTA I can easily see this happening and this is why I was always against this project and will be closely monitoring the initial performance of it.

 

A better idea would be to solve and crowding at it's source but the source of everything subway related has to be Manhattan so here we are. Billions of dollars spent for no improvements in the commutes of working class North Bronxites.

[Porter]

A better idea would be to solve and crowding at it's source but the source of everything subway related has to be Manhattan so here we are. Billions of dollars spent for no improvements in the commutes of working class North Bronxites.

 

I couldn't have said it better myself. I've already shared my thoughts on the solution to this very real problem (sending the closer to the source of the problem), so now it's just a matter of pestering the to rethink Phase 2.

Edited December 21, 2016 by Skipper

[CenSin]

Interesting. Do you by any chance know what an acceptable platform width is under ADA rules?

 

That's the only thing I can think of that would prevent 116th Street's platform from being built in the middle trackway...

Build side platforms. Add middle tracks. Bam. The MTA has a bit of rare Manhattan train storage track it can use. Cuts were made to remove the third track from 72 Street. I can imagine that they will cut any other extras such as a storage yard at 129 Street and 14 Street. Building just a track in that segment would cost minimal since the space already exists.

[bobtehpanda]

1. The problem I have a 2nd Avenue subway and with most of the MTA's transit planning in general is that it's not looking at solving the crowding issues from the source. One problem is that faulty ridership stats give the impression that overcrowding is only the result of intense demand from stops close to the peak load point which on the and lines couldn't be further from the truth. As someone who has used the 125th station on countless occasions over the years (mainly to xfer between the and trains) I can tell you that trains generally enter 125 rather crowded during AM Rush and half the train dumps at 125 for the xfer. Not once making that transfer did I think to myself that I would get a seat on the express since Bronx ridership is low. In fact 99% of the time the train whether or was almost full already. Which goes to show that the Bronx ridership alone creates overcrowding on these lines. But have the MTA tell it to you it's the 35,000 boarding at 125 and the 65,000 boarding at 86 which are causing the problems. If anything they just add to the problems but are in no way, shape or form the source of them. The source is without a doubt the Bronx. Each of the , and are pulling six figure totals from the Bronx into Manhattan with hardly any turnover in the Bronx on either line. The station by station ridership totals give a distorted picture as compared to what actually goes on with the Lexington Av Line.

 

2. Another source of Lex ridership that the Second Avenue Subway does nothing for are the folks transferring from Queens for East Side subway service.  Last time I checked, the crowds that disembark packed trains at 53rd-Lex and disembark packed and at 59th-Lex aren't doing so for the heck of it. Also, last time I checked hardly any of these people are commuting from residential enclaves in Queens to the residential Far East Side during peak work commute hours. Numerically speaking this riderbase (based on transfer estimates) is just as high as the inbound/outbound peak Bronx demand. 

 

A better idea would be to solve and crowding at it's source but the source of everything subway related has to be Manhattan so here we are. Billions of dollars spent for no improvements in the commutes of working class North Bronxites.

 

To play the devil's advocate here; hypothetically speaking, if you were to relieve the Lex and the Queens lines, how would you do it? What lines would you send them to? Because the reason SAS is getting built the way it is is because of the complete lack of core capacity. If you were to magically open a Third Av El replacement in the Bronx tomorrow, you'd just be dumping people onto the same core trunk lines that are already at capacity. To open up new lines to the outer boroughs, you need to expand core capacity first; bringing people from the Bronx into Manhattan requires a line in Manhattan, which is Phases I and II, and you need Phase I to be finished before Phase II for it to be of any use.

 

As a former Queens commuter on the and , it would please me to no end if SAS capacity was used to relieve those lines. But to start even making a dent into that, you need both Phases III and IV; Phase III by itself would be useless for any Queens riders since there isn't much on Second between 63rd and Houston that those riders are looking for. And even if you did build that, to take advantage of that capacity you would need a Queens Blvd Bypass, which you can't build first because there's no core capacity to send trains into. Peak loading on the Lex is also between 42nd and 125th, so building all the way south to Houston St before building north to 125th sounds like a mess.

 

The logical order of phasing is Phase I, II, III, and IV, with a extension through the Bronx happening after phase II and the extension through Queens occurring sometime after Phase IV. At $2.7B a mile, there is no feasible way to have built this thing out any faster, because no one has $17B in spare change lying around at any level of government.

Edited December 21, 2016 by bobtehpanda

[Caelestor]

People are getting mad here lol. I think we all agree that we believe the needs to be extended to 3 Ave - 149 St, but the problem is that the MTA can't keep costs down. Managements, union, and contractors are all colluding in the transportation-industrial complex everywhere in the country, but NYC is the worst. If things in NYC cost the same in London, the money in Phase 1 would have covered Phase 2 as well.

 

The UES crowding and Queens crowding are different issues who have a common solution in Phase 3 of the SAS. I actually think that building the Queens Bypass line takes precedent over Phase 4 because letting Phase 3 capacity go to waste is not a good idea. Split Phase 3 into a Phase 3A to 14 St, Phase 3B to Grand St, and Phase 3C into Queens.

[Wallyhorse]

The 125 St Crosstown would achieve the following:

• Permanent traffic reduction on 125 St by redirecting most bus ridership underground
• Easier East Side and Bronx access to City College and Columbia (both campuses)
• Easier UES and Midtown East access from Upper Manhattan

It won't do one important thing, though:

• Alleviate overcrowding on the ,

which is what an extension to 3 Ave - 149 St would probably do. Again, what gets built depends on the priorities of those in power. If Columbia really really wanted to build a subway to its campus, it probably has enough clout to do so.

 

The Bronx extension is never going to happen. For less money, I'd send it east to Laguardia if the NIMBYs change their minds.

I do agree on 3rd Avenue-149 that I would want to do as part of a Bronx SAS that actually would be a rebuild of the old Bronx 3rd Avenue EL that would take the line to the old line's former terminal at Gun Hill Road (either as EL or Subway where there can be transfers to the and as well).  The 125th Street Crosstown I think will be needed just as much because of both Columbia's massive expansion (to where it's too bad you can't make 125 on the a short-turn terminal) and by the time such were open the likelihood of a new Metro North Station at 125th Street and 12th Avenue (and as you noted, City College would benefit as well).   

 

As for the to The Bronx, that might actually be easier to do the same type of connection and have that go to 3rd Avenue-149 since much of that would actually be elevated (if not all of it).  Do that, and some riders might very well opt for the , especially if they are looking for Union Square or points within the same walking distance as stations on the Lexington or 7th Avenue lines. 

[richardye1]

I do agree on 3rd Avenue-149 that I would want to do as part of a Bronx SAS that actually would be a rebuild of the old Bronx 3rd Avenue EL that would take the line to the old line's former terminal at Gun Hill Road (either as EL or Subway where there can be transfers to the and as well).  The 125th Street Crosstown I think will be needed just as much because of both Columbia's massive expansion (to where it's too bad you can't make 125 on the a short-turn terminal) and by the time such were open the likelihood of a new Metro North Station at 125th Street and 12th Avenue (and as you noted, City College would benefit as well).   

 

As for the to The Bronx, that might actually be easier to do the same type of connection and have that go to 3rd Avenue-149 since much of that would actually be elevated (if not all of it).  Do that, and some riders might very well opt for the , especially if they are looking for Union Square or points within the same walking distance as stations on the Lexington or 7th Avenue lines. 

explain to me how people would opt for the , especially how it would be a roundabout route. i don't even know how someone would even get that thought.

[RailRunRob]

I do agree on 3rd Avenue-149 that I would want to do as part of a Bronx SAS that actually would be a rebuild of the old Bronx 3rd Avenue EL that would take the line to the old line's former terminal at Gun Hill Road (either as EL or Subway where there can be transfers to the and as well).  The 125th Street Crosstown I think will be needed just as much because of both Columbia's massive expansion (to where it's too bad you can't make 125 on the a short-turn terminal) and by the time such were open the likelihood of a new Metro North Station at 125th Street and 12th Avenue (and as you noted, City College would benefit as well).   

 

As for the to The Bronx, that might actually be easier to do the same type of connection and have that go to 3rd Avenue-149 since much of that would actually be elevated (if not all of it).  Do that, and some riders might very well opt for the , especially if they are looking for Union Square or points within the same walking distance as stations on the Lexington or 7th Avenue lines. 

to the Bronx? Elaborate.

[Porter]

If things in NYC cost the same in London, the money in Phase 1 would have covered Phase 2 as well.

 

The UES crowding and Queens crowding are different issues who have a common solution in Phase 3 of the SAS. I actually think that building the Queens Bypass line takes precedent over Phase 4 because letting Phase 3 capacity go to waste is not a good idea. Split Phase 3 into a Phase 3A to 14 St, Phase 3B to Grand St, and Phase 3C into Queens.

 

If the Brooklyn-Manhattan Transit or Independent Subway companies were still around, maybe it would have cost a whole lot less.

 

In my opinion, Phase "3C" into Queens would be better as Phase "3B" into Queens, bringing the on board ASAP. Once the SAS line is built to 14th Street, the only additional construction needed to instate service would be connecting the two spurs on the 63rd Street line to the Second Avenue line. Assuming that the SAS line will run over—and not under—the 63rd Street line (based on a diagram), The upper spur (downtown/Brooklyn) would have to curve under and around the SAS line, joining the southbound track from the western side of the tunnel; the lower spur (uptown/Queens) would have to rise significantly and join the northbound track from the eastern side of the tunnel.

 

I do agree on 3rd Avenue-149 that I would want to do as part of a Bronx SAS that actually would be a rebuild of the old Bronx 3rd Avenue EL that would take the line to the old line's former terminal at Gun Hill Road (either as EL or Subway where there can be transfers to the and as well).  The 125th Street Crosstown I think will be needed just as much because of both Columbia's massive expansion (to where it's too bad you can't make 125 on the a short-turn terminal) and by the time such were open the likelihood of a new Metro North Station at 125th Street and 12th Avenue (and as you noted, City College would benefit as well).  

 

I'd want to ultimately see both the 125th Street crosstown line and the extension up into the Bronx come to fruition, but even though the former would personally serve me better, the latter is objectively more significant and important to the transit system.

[Lance]

explain to me how people would opt for the , especially how it would be a roundabout route. i don't even know how someone would even get that thought.

They won't. Using his example of a hypothetical rider travelling between 3 Av-149 St and Union Square, the current trip between those two stations involves a direct route via the , for a grand total of seven stops and a trip that takes less than 20 minutes. I know because I have made that trip many times in the past few years.

 

Now here comes Wallyhorse with another of his "grand" ideas. Having the run to the Bronx while otherwise remaining on its present route of Astoria to Coney Island is dead on arrival. As always, such a route will not help the intended rider in the slightest. Nobody is going to take such a roundabout route over to the west side, back across to the east side, through Queens and then loop around to get to 3 Av-149 St just to avoid the Lexington Ave line. Last I checked, people still want to get to their destinations in a timely manner. Adding 30+ minutes to their commute does the opposite of that. To be honest, I'm more of a journey over destination guy myself, but not when I'm on the clock and have places to be, much like pretty much everyone else. To assume someone is going to give up their direct route just to get a seat is sheer lunacy. The only way the will head into the Bronx is if it hitches a ride on 2nd Avenue, which opens up another can of worms.

 

If the Brooklyn-Manhattan Transit or Independent Subway companies were still around, maybe it would have cost a whole lot less.

I strongly doubt that. Private interests generally don't do well when it comes to transportation costs unless they have some other major source of income to offset. In regards to the IND, which was built and operated by the city, they didn't fare so well either. Their massive, overbuilt stations and lines did nothing to help their bottom line and eventually they also went under. They reemerged as the BoT in the '40s because the competition was already eliminated and there was a definite need for subway service.

[Wallyhorse]

Now here comes Wallyhorse with another of his "grand" ideas. Having the run to the Bronx while otherwise remaining on its present route of Astoria to Coney Island is dead on arrival. As always, such a route will not help the intended rider in the slightest. Nobody is going to take such a roundabout route over to the west side, back across to the east side, through Queens and then loop around to get to 3 Av-149 St just to avoid the Lexington Ave line. Last I checked, people still want to get to their destinations in a timely manner. Adding 30+ minutes to their commute does the opposite of that. To be honest, I'm more of a journey over destination guy myself, but not when I'm on the clock and have places to be, much like pretty much everyone else. To assume someone is going to give up their direct route just to get a seat is sheer lunacy. The only way the will head into the Bronx is if it hitches a ride on 2nd Avenue, which opens up another can of worms.

My point was, extending the to The Bronx was to me something more likely to happen than the SAS to the Bronx until at least after Phase 4 of the SAS was complete.  Also, it would give those in The Bronx looking for Queens a way to get there WITHOUT going through Manhattan.  With the Queens Plaza area being built up as it has been in recent years (including a number of new office buildings going up) AND at some point the likelihood of a transfer between Queens Plaza and Queensboro Plaza, it would make such an extension to The Bronx worthy for those who may very well by the time it happens may be working in Queens (and also being able to have a two-seat ride if using the without having to go through Times Square or Grand Central).

 

That's where to me this extension to The Bronx would work.

 

Getting back on topic, as said, I would not only extend the SAS to 3rd Avenue-149th Street, I would have provisions in place to eventually fully extend that to cover what was lost in 1973 when The Bronx portion of the 3rd Avenue EL was closed, running to Gun Hill Road, most likely as a Phase 5/6 of the line.  If you built the extension to The Bronx, you could conceivably have BOTH run this route past 149.  

[Lance]

It would still be such a niche market that the expense would likely never be offset by the benefits. As for eliminating a two-seat ride, remember, the Astoria line is pretty short. Any rider not coming off the Astoria line itself will still have to transfer to this extended .

 

On the subject of provisions for a Bronx line, I believe the general idea thrown about is to build a subway line that parallels or runs close to the old 3rd Avenue elevated and the present Bx41 +Select. Whether it's down Webster Ave or 3rd Avenue is the main difference.

[richardye1]

My point was, extending the to The Bronx was to me something more likely to happen than the SAS to the Bronx until at least after Phase 4 of the SAS was complete.  Also, it would give those in The Bronx looking for Queens a way to get there WITHOUT going through Manhattan.  With the Queens Plaza area being built up as it has been in recent years (including a number of new office buildings going up) AND at some point the likelihood of a transfer between Queens Plaza and Queensboro Plaza, it would make such an extension to The Bronx worthy for those who may very well by the time it happens may be working in Queens (and also being able to have a two-seat ride if using the without having to go through Times Square or Grand Central).

 

That's where to me this extension to The Bronx would work.

 

Getting back on topic, as said, I would not only extend the SAS to 3rd Avenue-149th Street, I would have provisions in place to eventually fully extend that to cover what was lost in 1973 when The Bronx portion of the 3rd Avenue EL was closed, running to Gun Hill Road, most likely as a Phase 5/6 of the line.  If you built the extension to The Bronx, you could conceivably have BOTH run this route past 149.  

*sighs*

[trainfan22]

The 96th street station will open to the public next Thursday for a preview. 

 

 

 

The 96th Street station on the long-awaited Second Avenue subway line is open to the public Thursday for a sneak preview, multiple sources familiar with the decision tell NBC 4 New York.

Members of the public will be able to walk inside the station, check out the Metrocard machines, mezzanine, escalators and platforms.

 

http://www.nbcnewyork.com/news/local/Second-Avenue-Subway-Manhattan-96th-Street-Preview-Station-Metrocard-407919885.html

Edited December 22, 2016 by trainfan22

[Around the Horn]

The 96th street station will open to the public next Thursday for a preview. 

 

 

 

 

http://www.nbcnewyork.com/news/local/Second-Avenue-Subway-Manhattan-96th-Street-Preview-Station-Metrocard-407919885.html

That's interesting...

[Union Tpke]

Governor Cuomo Debuts New Subway Station at 96th Street and Invites New Yorkers to Open House Ahead of On-Time Opening of the Second Avenue Subway

Select Language​▼

 

December 22nd, 2016 

Governor Cuomo unveils Second Avenue Subway's 96th Street Station

Governor Andrew M. Cuomo debuted the new station at 96th Street on December 22, 2016, in advance of the historic, on-time opening of the Second Avenue Subway. At the event, the Governor invited New Yorkers to an open house for a preview tour of the station, which features high ceilings, column-free design, vibrant lighting, and world-class contemporary artwork. The open house marks the first time the public will have access to the Second Avenue Subway since the start of construction. The words "Excelsior" and "E Pluribus Unum" – New York’s message to people who ride the subways in New York – are displayed on the beams inside of the station. Photos of the new 96th Street station are available here.

Today’s event follows the Governor’s recent presentation of the largest public art installation in state history that will be featured in the new state-of-the-art Second Avenue Subway stations, including Sarah Sze’s “Blueprint for a Landscape” installation at the new 96th Street station. The inaugural Second Avenue Subway ride will be on December 31 and revenue service will begin at noon on January 1.

"With unparalleled architecture and newly installed artwork along the Second Avenue line, we are transforming these stations into underground galleries that encompass the spirit and cultural charm of New York," Governor Cuomo said. "This open house offers a unique opportunity for us to share this important project milestone with New Yorkers, and marks the progress we have made in delivering a new, vital artery to one of the nation’s busiest transit lines. I encourage all New Yorkers to come for a tour and see this new state-of-the-art station for themselves."

"Governor Cuomo challenged the MTA to work aggressively to open the Second Avenue Subway on time, and we have been working around the clock to meet this challenge," MTA Chairman and CEO Thomas F. Prendergast said. "We’re thrilled to start the new year with a new Subway line and invite all New Yorkers to come get a preview this week."

Open House
To give New Yorkers a special preview of the new station at 96th Street, the Governor announced special tours of the station will be offered at an open house. The open house will begin at the southwest corner of 96th Street and Second Avenue, and will take place at the following times:

• Thursday, December 22 from 2:30 p.m. to 4:30 p.m.
• Friday, December 23 from 8 a.m. to 10 a.m.; and from 5 p.m. to 7 p.m.

MTA staff will be on-hand to answer questions and to distribute maps, cookies and commemorative items marking the historic transit expansion.

The new station features include access for the disabled, climate control to maximize customer comfort, modern computerized signage, and column-free construction for an open, airy atmosphere. The station spans three city blocks at 1,591 feet long and 57 feet wide, and was built with high-ceiling and column-free design to create an airy sense of openness. Its two-tiered mezzanine design is a fixture of the Second Avenue Subway stations and improves the flow of riders, reduces crowding on the platform and enhances the overall subway experience for riders.

The artwork that visitors will see at the 96th Street Station features familiar objects – sheets of paper, scaffolding, birds, trees, and foliage – caught up in a whirlwind velocity that picks up speed and intensity as the composition unfolds throughout the station. Called “Blueprint for a Landscape,” the installation by Sarah Sze is applied directly to nearly 4,300 unique porcelain wall tiles, spanning approximately 14,000 square feet. Photos of the Second Avenue subway art are available here; a video featuring the art is available here.

Phase 1
Phase 1 of the Second Avenue Subway includes three new ADA-compliant stations at 96th Street, 86th Street and 72nd Street, and new entrances to the existing Lexington Av/63rd Street Station at 63rdStreet and Third Avenue. It will provide service from 96th Street to 63rd Street and will serve more than 200,000 people per day, reducing overcrowding on the Lexington Avenue Line and restoring a transit link to a neighborhood that lost the Second Avenue Elevated in 1940. The existing Q-line will continue through 63rd Street all the way to Coney Island.

Revenue service will begin at noon on January 1, when the first uptown Q train to Second Avenue departs from the 57th-7th Avenue station. Trains will run every six minutes during peak hours and will run from 6 a.m. to 10 p.m. for the rest of the first week. Overnight service will begin on Monday, January 9.

Phase I of the Second Avenue Subway will decrease crowding on the adjacent Lexington Avenue Line by as much as 13 percent, or 23,500 fewer riders on an average weekday. It will also reduce travel times by up to 10 minutes or more for those on the far east side or those traveling from the east side to west midtown. Further phases of the project will extend the line to Hanover Square in the Financial District. The new stations will provide transfers to other subway and commuter rail lines.

Earlier this week, the Governor announced the installation of more than 12,600 new in-car subway maps and approximately 1,000 large station maps featuring the new Second Avenue Subway line. He also unveiled the dramatic new artwork that will adorn the new Second Avenue Subway stations, now the largest permanent public art installation in New York State history.

As part of the Governor’s efforts to build a 21st century transportation network smarter, faster and more efficient than ever before, the state is launching “The New MTA” webpage. The webpage will offer a one-stop guide to the proposals that are part of New York’s unprecedented $100 billion infrastructure plan to build a new New York.

The Second Avenue Subway expansion is part of the Governor’s sweeping statewide initiative to redevelop and rebuild New York’s aging infrastructure from the ground up. The comprehensive plan includes a new LaGuardia Airport, completely redesigned Penn Station, the LIRR 2nd and 3rd Track projects, the New New York Bridge, a major expansion of the Jacob K. Javits Center, as well as a complete overhaul and upgrades to the MTA's seven bridges and two tunnels in the metropolitan region.

From subchat: