Second Avenue Subway Discussion

[Amiri the subway guy]

3 minutes ago, Amiri the subway guy said:

New proposal 

In Harlem a new 125th Street Crosstown Subway line would be build with transfer to the 1/2/3/4/5/6/A/C/B/D. The T train would be sent there this gives People on West Harlem easier access to the East Side of Manhattan taking pressure off the 7/L trains. 

As for the Bronx the most popular proposal is to rebuild the 3rd Avenue line so I split it up into multiple phases in order to better manage the costs phase 1 would be to build a new tunnel in the Harlem river and extending the Q train to 3rd Avenue 149th street. Phase 2 would be to extend the Q to Fordham Plaza. And phase 3 would be to extend the Q to Gun Hill Road. A optional phase 4 to Co Op City should be studied too.  This would balance out west and east side TPH. And maybe even reduce crowding on the 2 train since now people would have a another option of getting to the West side of Manhattan. The 3rd Avenue line would have three tracks to allow for a peak way express and creation of a new <Q>Express Train. The express stops would be Co Op city, Gun Hill Road, Fordham Plaza, Tremont Avenue, 3rd Avenue 149th street, and 3rd Avenue 138th street. 

 

Now usually it’s the T via Bronx and Q via Harlem y’all used to but the reasoning for it is that currently they is 50 trains during rush hours heading to east midtown the 4/5/6 trains vs 25/30 trains heading to west midtown the 2/D. The 1 is further west away from the rest of the Bronx line and only three stations so technically we could exclude it in this scenario. The B is a rush hour only extension and runs on the same route as the D so it doesn’t really count as it’s own Individual line. Add the Q train would balance the ridership access out. And Broadway is a much more attractive line to be extended to the Bronx since it stops at a bunch of major transfer points in midtown ETC (Times Square Herald Square Union Square).

And sending the T to 125th street crosstown would give the people on Harlem easier access to the east side of Manhattan reducing crowding on the 7/L trains.

And people are saying that the Q train might be too long while I agree with this at first. Realistic that argument is moot cause I believe we overestimated the length cause let’s be honest the Q train won’t be anywhere near as long as the A or F trains. It would be around the same length as the B train. In fact my proposed K train route would be longer than the Q train

My estimate on the Q train length.

Longer than the N train, Shorter than the D train.

On queens a new 4 track Northern Blvd subway line would be build two new new 2nd Avenue lines will be created these are both currently defunct services the K and V trains. 
 

The K train would start off at Springfield blvd then it will meet up with the V train at Utopia Parkway  the V train would run local while the K train would run express. The local only stations are 

164th Street

Kissena Blvd 

Main Street Elder Avenue 

College Point Blvd

108th Street

100th Street

85th Street

78th Street

Local and Express stops 

Utopia Parkway

Willets Points Blvd (transfers to flushing line)

Junction Blvd

Broadway Northern Blvd (transfers to queens blvd line)

Both trains are based out of Sunnyside Yard 

The K train would branch off Broadway stoping at 
 

31st Street (transfer to Astoria line)

21st Street 

Then a lower level at 72nd Street 2nd Avenue would be made then the K train rises up at 42nd street as the express service. 
 

The V train 

would branch using the existing 63rd street tunnel than connects to 55th Street running local with the T train.

The reasoning why I propose Northern Blvd/2nd Ave express trains using the 63rd St tunnel. Is that It would allow would allow riders coming from 6th Ave, Queens blvd, Hillside the chance to easily transfer to the 2nd Ave Subway.

2nd Avenue would be expanded to 4 tracks the K train would extend to a new Williamburg Utica Avenue  line first it would stop at Clinton Street and Bedford Avenue 

The proposed Utica Avenue line would include 8th Avenue and 2nd Avenue services

The E train would also be extended to Williamsburg using the Worth Street provisions with the stations at Worth Street Chambers Street, Chatham Square, East Broadway and finally Montgomery Street. The Benefits are that it opens up new transfer options for riders in lower Manhattan. World Trade Center terminal will continue to get service but during rush hours only. The World Trade Center would be used to terminate extra C/E train during rush hours if their isn’t capacity on the Brooklyn routes when CBTC is Installed on the 8th Avenue, Fulton street, and the proposed Williamsburg lines. So a total of 8-10 rush hour trains would terminate there 4-5 rush hour C/E trains each would be sent there. But that might limit capacity on the Fulton street and the proposed Williamsburg lines. At all other times WTC is closed so you have to take the E to canal street for an A or C train I mean the Chambers street and World Trade Center are literally the same station complex so shutting it down shouldn’t be too much of a problem, however it does have a ridership count so some people might not like the sound of being forced to transfer at Canal Street for a A/C train. The World Trade Center would still be used for emergencies or G.O work.

 

The E train will also make one stop at Bedford Avenue before meeting up with the K train at Havemeyer street 

 

This route would run south 3rd street and Utica Avenue it would be a 4 track line the E train is the local and the K train is the express. 

 

Local exclusive stops 

Flushing Avenue

Lafayette Avenue 

Halsey Street 

Prospect Place

Empire Blvd

Church Avenue 

Avenue D

Flatlands Avenue 

Avenue N

 

All local and express stops

Havemeyer Street 

Broadway South 4th street

Myrtle Avenue 

Utica Avenue Fulton Street

Crown Heights Utica Avenue 

Kings Highway 

Flatlands Avenue 

Avenue N

Kings Plaza Utica Avenue 

 

This proposed south 3rd street and Utica Avenue line would help balance the load of new commuters from Williamsburg, Bushwick and Bed-Stuy which currently use the L or M to get to Midtown or take the J to get to Lower Manhattan. The J train and the BMT Centre St Subway in general suffer from being built when everyone from northern Brooklyn were headed to lower Manhattan and the Financial District. Today commuting patterns have changed that now both lower Manhattan and midtown are popular designations but the high cost of new infrastructure has hampered the ability to make needed service changes. The new Williamburg line that would be served by the E and K trains would give communters more alternatives for folks in Williamburg other than having to use the congested J/Z M and L trains. And it’s would be very attractive as it offers both west side and east side access to Manhattan. 
 

Phase 4 would be build too
Hanover Square would be expanded to 4 tracks the inner tracks used for terminating trains the outer tracks used for Brooklyn service. Both the T and V trains would be extend to Fulton street local using the Court Street transit museum link. T/V meets up with the A/C at Hoyt Street the C train would be moved to the Express tracks with the A train on Broadway junction the T train would branch off to recapture the Atlantic Avenue branch and run up to Jamaica Center. The V train would continue to Euclid Avenue. The C train would be extended to Lefferts Blvd. All A trains can than be diverted to Far Rockway and Rockway Park. During Evenings/Weekends the V train would only run up to Hanover Square the C train runs local only up to Euclid Avenue. The A train also goes to Lefferts Blvd during these hours. Rockway shuttle also operates weekends and late nights. During late nights V train won’t operate at all the K train operates local in its place. Lefferts shuttle still operates during late nights.

I gotta admit this will cost FAR MORE than the current proposed second ave subway but what I trying to say is that the current plan only helps people in the east side of Manhattan travel a bit better. It does practically NOTHING for riders from The Bronx Queens or Brooklyn. I mean the biggest flaw is that there no express tracks HECK they isn’t even a third track that could be used for emergencies. Meaning that if something goes wrong at one station THE ENTIRE LINE is screwed up. I mean at least make room for the express for when ridership increases they can be build easily. The current transfers to 2nd Av require riders to use multiple stairs long corridors and transfer to multiple train routes all because planners are either too scared or don’t want to even bother design their projects to full potential. If the 2nd Ave Subway is not designed properly then it will be one of if not the most expensive mistake the MTA makes. The NYC Subway has a long history of poor planning mistakes which have limited service ever since; 2nd ave subway is the PERFECT  opportunity to redeem ourselves. 

 I’m concerned about the cost of course. But government please fund the mta. The government really needs to invest more money to the MTA.

The 2nd Ave subway is a subway line needed to not just relieve congestion along the east side of Manhattan Lexington Ave subway but also many other subways that service the entire city. My main concern about the 2nd ave proposal is that MTA will try and build the cheapest subway it can which the MTA will regret DEARLY when the population grows. The ideal for some 2nd Ave subway proposal is that it adds capacity ( 2nd ave line should be incorporated into existing lines so that existing trains could be used for improved service elsewhere)

The community and the MTA should also work together to find a solution that works out best. Costs must be brought under control cost should not be an excuse to build a less effective subway line. Transit should be built where it’s most effective not where it’s cheapest to build. 

I’ll make a map on this plan later please give feedback 

 

 

PS routings 

T train Broadway 125th street - Jamaica Center (2nd Avenue Local Fulton street Local Atlantic Avenue Local)

K train Springfield Blvd - Kings Plaza Utica Avenue ( Northern Blvd Express 2nd Avenue Express Williamsburg Utica Avenue Express)

V train Utopia Parkway - Euclid Avenue (Northern Blvd Local 2nd Avenue Local Fulton Street local)

 

[GojiMet86]

https://www.nydailynews.com/new-york/ny-second-ave-subway-tunnel-gov-hochul-20211124-xdwpezc4mjg5hjy23jxjzl5ezi-story.html

 

Quote

 

Gov. Hochul sees light at end of NYC’s long-abandoned Second Ave. subway tunnel during tour with MTA chief
By Clayton Guse
November 23, 2021 7:42 PM

 

New York is about to build the world’s most expensive subway line — a project that’s been in the works for a century. Gov. Hochul on Tuesday toured a long-abandoned tunnel beneath Second Ave. in East Harlem that Metropolitan Transportation Authority officials plan to repurpose for the second phase of the Second Ave. subway.

The tunnel will help extend the Q line from its current northern terminus at Second Ave. and E. 96th St. to E. 125th St. and Lexington Ave. with two new stations in between.

The old tunnel runs between E. 110th St. and E. 120th St., and was dug in the early 1970s. Work stopped in 1974 amid the city’s financial crisis.

Extending the Second Ave. Subway 1.6 miles to Harlem will cost an estimated $6.3 billion, say MTA officials.

That’s $3.9 billion per mile, far and away the highest cost of any subway extension project in the history of the world, according to a study by researchers at New York University’s Marron Institute.

The price does not include the cost to use debt to finance the project, which brings the total bill to $6.9 billion.

The MTA has for more than two years awaited movement by the Federal Transit Administration to approve $3.4 billion to get the project going. Hochul on Tuesday said the money would come soon thanks to the infrastructure bill signed by President Biden earlier this month.

“We think we can get started one year from now,” Hochul said. Acting MTA chairman Janno Lieber said the sky-high price tag was a “bargain.”

“It will serve, when it opens, as many people as the entire Philadelphia subway system,” said Lieber.

“Everybody likes to talk about cost, but you’ve got to look at how many people it serves,” he said. “By the standards of riders, this is an incredibly efficient project, especially compared to everything else that comes before the federal government for funding.”

MTA filings to the feds estimate the construction of the extension will take seven years to finish. If that holds true, trains won’t run beneath Second Ave. in East Harlem until at least the end of 2029.

“I’m doing it in my terms in office, so it’s going to be a lot less than that,” Hochul said. She hopes the project will be speeded up by the controversial “design-build” contracting method the MTA has since 2019 been required by state law to employ.

Under design-build, the MTA consolidates design and construction work into a single contract rather than multiple separate contracts. Its impact on speeding up projects is not yet clear.

Hochul is the ninth governor to hold office since the East Harlem tunnel project broke ground during Nelson Rockefeller’s administration.

Plans to build the Second Ave. subway date back to the 1920s, when private companies ran the city’s subway lines. But it never came to fruition.

The abandoned tunnel Hochul toured is dusty, rusty and tattered — and it’s not the only one. The MTA in 1974 also stopped work on another Second Ave. tunnel between 99th and 105th Sts. that Lieber said will also be repurposed.

Another tunnel built by the city under Canal St. in Chinatown for the Second Ave. subway was also abandoned — but changes to the line’s plan mean it’s no longer needed.

The Second Ave. subway’s construction was approved in 1967 when New York voters OK’d $2.5 billion of bonds to pay for transportation improvements.

At the time, city and state officials planned for the line to run along Manhattan’s East Side up into the Bronx. If MTA officials ever make good plans for the line’s final two phases, the line would one day stretch from 125th St. to Hanover Square in the Financial District.

The money approved in 1967 was also supposed to pay for a set of double-decker East River tunnels, one of which now carries the F line between Manhattan and Queens. The other tunnel is being used for the MTA’s East Side Access project to bring Long Island Rail Road trains into a new station beneath Grand Central Terminal, which is expected to open to the public in Dec. 2022.

 

 

 

This line got me:

Acting MTA chairman Janno Lieber said the sky-high price tag was a “bargain.”

The delusion with these people, sheesh.

[Vulturious]

27 minutes ago, GojiMet86 said:

https://www.nydailynews.com/new-york/ny-second-ave-subway-tunnel-gov-hochul-20211124-xdwpezc4mjg5hjy23jxjzl5ezi-story.html

 

 

 

This line got me:

Acting MTA chairman Janno Lieber said the sky-high price tag was a “bargain.”

The delusion with these people, sheesh.

I guess we're not learning anything from Phase 1, not surprised that no one did. Then again, it's just false hopes thinking someone would get people to change their minds when approaching stuff like this.

[Wallyhorse]

Probably.  I suspect they just assume the high price tag and don't look for ways to cut the cost without cutting "quality." 

[CenSin]

5 hours ago, Wallyhorse said:

"quality." 

“I don’t need that…”

“But sir, the free iPhone comes with this $1,000 bag of Cheetos.”

Substitute iPhone with humongous station caverns and Cheetos with neutered SAS mainline, yada yada…

[Around the Horn]

On 11/23/2021 at 10:50 PM, GojiMet86 said:

https://www.nydailynews.com/new-york/ny-second-ave-subway-tunnel-gov-hochul-20211124-xdwpezc4mjg5hjy23jxjzl5ezi-story.html

 

 

 

This line got me:

Acting MTA chairman Janno Lieber said the sky-high price tag was a “bargain.”

The delusion with these people, sheesh.

He's not necessarily wrong.

On a per-rider basis this is actually cheaper than a lot of other projects in the infrastructure bill. Transit projects in the United States are just that bad across the board.

 

[T to Dyre Avenue]

This one, too…

https://mobile.twitter.com/dmtrubman/status/1463495844485808150

But still, the MTA should at least be trying to bring down the cost of the Lex/125 station. Phase 2 shouldn’t be costing more than Phase 1 with all that existing tunnel already dug in the 70s.

Edited November 26, 2021 by T to Dyre Avenue

[BreeddekalbL]

Based on their logic now they should end phase 3 at the partially built houston station above the F then if they ever make it to phase 4 use the already built platforms at grand and use existing tunnels down there

[Lawrence St]

Can someone please tell me HOW it’s going to take 8 years to extend the Q to 125th St when 90% of the infrastructure is already in place?

[Vulturious]

Just now, Lawrence St said:

Can someone please tell me HOW it’s going to take 8 years to extend the Q to 125th St when 90% of the infrastructure is already in place?

Not enough people are pushing for it, they're too busy prioritizing other things and too busy trying to exploit as much money as possible when building new things. 

[rbrome]

On 1/7/2022 at 8:12 PM, Lawrence St said:

Can someone please tell me HOW it’s going to take 8 years to extend the Q to 125th St when 90% of the infrastructure is already in place?

It's nowhere near 90%.

But it should take half as long as cost 1/4 as much, in any sane world. There is simply a looong list of people in the private sector who have figured out how to pad contracts like this for maximum extra profit. The revolving door and contracting practices of the MTA just encourages it. There is no cost control, no incentives for cost control, and no oversight from Albany. So the contractors treat the capital construction budget like a bottomless piggy bank, and the MTA just... lets it happen.

Stretching out the timeline is just one of the many ways they inflate the price tag. 

Edited January 9, 2022 by rbrome

[Storrb]

I suppose I'll post my opinion on SAS Phase II, since I haven't yet done so. 

Ending the line at Lexington and 125th is a huge mistake. One reason why the second phase is going to cost so much is the sharp curve at 125th and the property acquisition required. Not tunneling into the Bronx will kneecap the line's usefulness. I doubt many people will transfer from the 4,5, and 6 (even fewer from Metro North because afaik it will not be a free transfer) unless they work on the Upper East Side. But midtown (and to a much lesser extent) downtown are where the bulk of jobs are, not the UES. Even if bell mouths were included for a possible future extension to the Bronx (which was already nixed years ago) the station at 125th and Lexington combined with the two track nature of the SAS, will limit the number of trains that would be able to go to the Bronx if a future extension was built. 

The Harlem River is very shallow, digging a trench and sinking a pre-fabricated tunnel into place has been done many times in the past in wider and deeper bodies of water. In fact, that's the exact method the IRT used when building the Lexington Ave. Harlem River tunnels in 1913-4! https://www.nycsubway.org/wiki/The_Construction_of_the_Harlem_River_Tubes_(1915)

Local New Yorkers will know better than I, but a transfer from the Pelham Line to SAS at 3rd Avenue 138th Street would seem to be more useful than the planned one. At 125th Street, Pelham Line riders can use the existing cross platform to transfer onto Lexington Ave. express trains. That is already more convenient than the planned transfer, which will be located below the existing Lex. 125th Street station.  Why go down a level instead of taking the familiar easy cross platform transfer? If a transfer is located in in the Bronx, before train riders have the opportunity to transfer onto Lexington Avenue express trains, it seems fairly easy to assume more Pelham riders will use SAS than under the current proposal. Similar logic applies to a 3rd Avenue 149th Street SAS transfer for White Plains Road  and train riders who under the current plan, will either not be able to transfer onto SAS  or would be inclined to not transfer once in Manhattan since they are already on an express train  , unless their destination is east of 3rd Avenue. I realize if the SAS went to the Bronx following 3rd Avenue, instead of ending at Lex. and 125th Street, Woodlawn Line  riders would not be able to transfer to SAS. New Yorkers please correct me if I'm wrong, but the White Plains Road and Pelham Lines are the lines in the Bronx which most need help to reduce overcrowding and meet demand.  is already paralleled by the IND Grand Concourse Line, anyway. 

Edited January 16, 2022 by Storrb

[Vulturious]

3 hours ago, Storrb said:

I suppose I'll post my opinion on SAS Phase II, since I haven't yet done so. 

Ending the line at Lexington and 125th is a huge mistake. One reason why the second phase is going to cost so much is the sharp curve at 125th and the property acquisition required. Not tunneling into the Bronx will kneecap the line's usefulness. I doubt many people will transfer from the 4,5, and 6 (even fewer from Metro North because afaik it will not be a free transfer) unless they work on the Upper East Side. But midtown (and to a much lesser extent) downtown are where the bulk of jobs are, not the UES. Even if bell mouths were included for a possible future extension to the Bronx (which was already nixed years ago) the station at 125th and Lexington combined with the two track nature of the SAS, will limit the number of trains that would be able to go to the Bronx if a future extension was built. 

The Harlem River is very shallow, digging a trench and sinking a pre-fabricated tunnel into place has been done many times in the past in wider and deeper bodies of water. In fact, that's the exact method the IRT used when building the Lexington Ave. Harlem River tunnels in 1913-4! https://www.nycsubway.org/wiki/The_Construction_of_the_Harlem_River_Tubes_(1915)

Local New Yorkers will know better than I, but a transfer from the Pelham Line to SAS at 3rd Avenue 138th Street would seem to be more useful than the planned one. At 125th Street, Pelham Line riders can use the existing cross platform to transfer onto Lexington Ave. express trains. That is already more convenient than the planned transfer, which will be located below the existing Lex. 125th Street station.  Why go down a level instead of taking the familiar easy cross platform transfer? If a transfer is located in in the Bronx, before train riders have the opportunity to transfer onto Lexington Avenue express trains, it seems fairly easy to assume more Pelham riders will use SAS than under the current proposal. Similar logic applies to a 3rd Avenue 149th Street SAS transfer for White Plains Road  and train riders who under the current plan, will either not be able to transfer onto SAS  or would be inclined to not transfer once in Manhattan since they are already on an express train  , unless their destination is east of 3rd Avenue. I realize if the SAS went to the Bronx following 3rd Avenue, instead of ending at Lex. and 125th Street, Woodlawn Line  riders would not be able to transfer to SAS. New Yorkers please correct me if I'm wrong, but the White Plains Road and Pelham Lines are the lines in the Bronx which most need help to reduce overcrowding and meet demand.  is already paralleled by the IND Grand Concourse Line, anyway. 

I completely agree with you on this one. Then again, my opinion might not count because I know for a fact some people might just end up calling me out or generalizing everyone, but an opinion is an opinion that isn't really hurting anyone's feelings so I'll just keep talking. 

This subject has been brought plenty of times and not on this forum either. I really don't understand the backwards mindset the MTA and many other politicians on trying to make this work. There's really no way a lot of people are willing to go and transfer to the  at 125 St unless people really had no choice because of something happening along Lexington Av. The only other way I can really see people willing transfer to the  from the  is if the  ran some sort of crosstown service along 125 St towards St. Nicholas Av where CPW line operates which is the  lines or just to the West side of Manhattan in general. This doesn't just benefit WPR and Pelham riders either, people from the East side of Manhattan in general might want an easier way of getting to the West side of Manhattan. I know 125 St lies on a fault line or something, but wouldn't it be possible to at least extend the second phase to St. Nicholas Av?

When it comes to Bronx riders, the  riders has an alternative in case and the MTA has made it clear plenty of times whenever something happened with Jerome line, riders could always transfer to the . They're not that far apart and are parallel for the most part from 161 St to Bedford Park Blvd. Certain ELs never had a replacement when they were demolished, the 3rd Av EL clearly never did and was planned to have one with the SAS. This left a void and obviously this was also brought up plenty of times too, but it's not like buses are the best alternative either. Busways are cool and all, but with NYC traffic and idiots running around, cities in general aren't meant to deal with this much traffic anyway.

[mrsman]

I largely agree.  Bronx  passengers are not transferring to  at 125th street unless their destination is on the very east side of the Upper East Side.  Even if their ulitmate destination were on the parts of the Broadway line that are relatively far from the Lex line (basically within Manhattan that means the stops along 7 Av north of 42nd and the stops along Broadway between 23rd and 42nd), they are more likely to stay on a Lex train and transfer to  at 59th to continue that trip.  It would be shorter and quicker and as said earlier, the transfers are more familiar.  Keep in mind that there is no express on 2nd Ave, so the only folks who would transfer off  would be those who need the 2nd Ave section, not the 7th Ave or Broadway sections.

Lex trains can only be decongested by this line if some of the Bronx passengers transfer earlier, if the line reaches 3rd Ave in teh Bronx with transfers to  and  .  Full utility can only be reached with a 125th crosstown to reach West Harlem and provide transfers for pepole going from Upper East Side (and East Harlem) to West Harlem and the like.

So let's hope that extensions along 125th and 3rd Ave are on the horizon.  IMO, they should be prioritized before extending  service down into Midtown and Lower Manhattan.

[Via Garibaldi 8]

On 1/8/2022 at 10:52 PM, rbrome said:

It's nowhere near 90%.

But it should take half as long as cost 1/4 as much, in any sane world. There is simply a looong list of people in the private sector who have figured out how to pad contracts like this for maximum extra profit. The revolving door and contracting practices of the MTA just encourages it. There is no cost control, no incentives for cost control, and no oversight from Albany. So the contractors treat the capital construction budget like a bottomless piggy bank, and the MTA just... lets it happen.

Stretching out the timeline is just one of the many ways they inflate the price tag. 

And what do you propose that the  do to stop it? If you've ever bid on projects before (I have), the RFP process is what it is. Bidders come in with a price, timeline and whatever else the RFP calls for, and the practice is to go with the lowest bidder out of three. Now you can always put out the bid again, but let's be honest here. The  doesn't have a sea of vendors to choose from to begin with. For these very large projects, you've got the big boys like Skanska out here. A company I used to work for in the construction industry, we once bid on a project they bid on, but they are in another league in terms of size and scope of the projects they take on. I can't think of too many other large construction companies like them either. 

Now one thing that they could do perhaps is to re-write their RFPs to try to broaden how many companies apply, but I don't see much else that they can do. The work has to be done by somebody, and sometimes, RFPs can be so cumbersome that some vendors don't bother with all of the red tape. To make it worth the headache in terms of the overhead costs and time, the price and timelines have to be increased. Just the way it is, especially with construction in NYC. All of the regulations and red tape mean increased costs and more time needed.

Any real change with how the  handles the procurement process would have to come from Albany and don't bank on that changing anytime soon.

12 hours ago, mrsman said:

I largely agree.  Bronx  passengers are not transferring to  at 125th street unless their destination is on the very east side of the Upper East Side.  Even if their ulitmate destination were on the parts of the Broadway line that are relatively far from the Lex line (basically within Manhattan that means the stops along 7 Av north of 42nd and the stops along Broadway between 23rd and 42nd), they are more likely to stay on a Lex train and transfer to  at 59th to continue that trip.  It would be shorter and quicker and as said earlier, the transfers are more familiar.  Keep in mind that there is no express on 2nd Ave, so the only folks who would transfer off  would be those who need the 2nd Ave section, not the 7th Ave or Broadway sections.

Lex trains can only be decongested by this line if some of the Bronx passengers transfer earlier, if the line reaches 3rd Ave in teh Bronx with transfers to  and  .  Full utility can only be reached with a 125th crosstown to reach West Harlem and provide transfers for pepole going from Upper East Side (and East Harlem) to West Harlem and the like.

So let's hope that extensions along 125th and 3rd Ave are on the horizon.  IMO, they should be prioritized before extending  service down into Midtown and Lower Manhattan.

I don't know why this whole terminating at 125th St instead of the Bronx is such a big deal. The extension of the  line isn't just about the Bronx. There are many other people that will benefit from it. The amount of economic development is booming along 125th St, and this is not going to change anytime soon. It is the next new economic and residential hub in Manhattan and the biggest thing happening in Upper Manhattan in terms of the amount of monies being invested. Now I'm not saying that there shouldn't an extension into the Bronx, but this idea of doom and gloom is just ridiculous. The line will be used and will be a big help for residents in East Harlem, other parts of Manhattan and Brooklyn. Just extending it from 96th to 125th is a big enough transformation.

Edited January 17, 2022 by Via Garibaldi 8

[Lex]

41 minutes ago, Via Garibaldi 8 said:

I don't know why this whole terminating at 125th St instead of the Bronx is such a big deal. The extension of the  line isn't just about the Bronx. There are many other people that will benefit from it. The amount of economic development is booming along 125th St, and this is not going to change anytime soon. It is the next new economic and residential hub in Manhattan and the biggest thing happening in Upper Manhattan in terms of the amount of monies being invested. Now I'm not saying that there shouldn't an extension into the Bronx, but this idea of doom and gloom is just ridiculous. The line will be used and will be a big help for residents in East Harlem, other parts of Manhattan and Brooklyn. Just extending it from 96th to 125th is a big enough transformation.

My issue with Phase 2's terminus is that it stubs at Lexington Avenue when it would be considerably more useful as a crosstown. Of course, getting those construction costs down would be helpful.

[Via Garibaldi 8]

27 minutes ago, Lex said:

My issue with Phase 2's terminus is that it stubs at Lexington Avenue when it would be considerably more useful as a crosstown. Of course, getting those construction costs down would be helpful.

And that right there is the main problem. You want anything Crosstown, you can go right on ahead and double the cost of the project and then some, not to mention the time. When I was in the industry, some companies would come in with nice quotes for projects for certain trades, but they were skimping somewhere. Some of them, you have to chase them down for insurance, or it's a pain getting them to meet the requirements, or they actually sub out the work to some smaller unknown company. 

The costs are high, but that's the difference between a skilled union worker and some guy picked up off the street. The cost can be three to four times more.

Something else being overlooked that I should've mentioned earlier. NYC has some of the most stringent construction regulations around. More regulations=higher costs. Then there is the land issue. "Dirt" is expensive in NYC. Doesn't matter where the construction is happening. On the plus side, we also have some amazing abilities to turn around construction projects. You want a construction project done here... You can get it done quickly, but you'll pay for it.

Edited January 17, 2022 by Via Garibaldi 8

[rbrome]

6 hours ago, Via Garibaldi 8 said:

And what do you propose that the  do to stop it?

Better leadership would look at how it's done elsewhere in the world. And what they would find is that the MTA's global peers usually have a large in-house team of full-time engineers and management for capital construction. When you can design these projects yourself, that greatly reduces overhead, and gives you the competency to choose cheaper alternatives and keep costs under control. The MTA should only be contracting out the actual construction. 

[Via Garibaldi 8]

23 minutes ago, rbrome said:

Better leadership would look at how it's done elsewhere in the world. And what they would find is that the MTA's global peers usually have a large in-house team of full-time engineers and management for capital construction. When you can design these projects yourself, that greatly reduces overhead, and gives you the competency to choose cheaper alternatives and keep costs under control. The MTA should only be contracting out the actual construction. 

Yeah, but #1, the  has stated that their expertise is NOT in construction and the only way they'd be able to gain such expertise is by hiring and paying handsomely for such talent, which for an agency that constantly cries broke (and would be even if COVID wasn't a thing) doesn't seem feasible at this time. #2, you can look at how it's done elsewhere all you want. New York City is like no other place when it comes to construction, and you can not get around the regulations and red tape either. Doing more in house in theory could be cheaper, but the  is supposed to be in the business of moving people from point A to point B, not construction.

Hiring a GC with experience and expertise to oversee such large projects is pretty commonplace. They work on behalf of the client first and foremost, and yes there is a price to pay for that, but if you work with the same vendors, over time, you solidify relationships that makes every project that much fluid and easier. Finally, the  is just too big and too boxed in to deal with such things. As someone who has spent years running projects and being on the management side of things, construction and project management is all about forecasting and managing potential crises. The  is not proactive. It is REACTIVE. I can't ever see them getting into the business of more in-house management. If anything, I'd argue that we'd see even more bloated projects with less oversight.

What you haven't discussed is how they are essentially forced by State law to always pick the lowest bidder, which isn't always in their best interest and at times has cost them more time and money.

Edited January 17, 2022 by Via Garibaldi 8

[R10 2952]

21 minutes ago, rbrome said:

Better leadership would look at how it's done elsewhere in the world. And what they would find is that the MTA's global peers usually have a large in-house team of full-time engineers and management for capital construction. When you can design these projects yourself, that greatly reduces overhead, and gives you the competency to choose cheaper alternatives and keep costs under control. The MTA should only be contracting out the actual construction. 

THANK YOU!   In fact, the MTA used to do a lot more work in-house in the past than they do now.  Before the mid-to-late 1990s, it was not uncommon for station rehabs (Franklin and 225th on the) and yard projects to be done in-house by the agency with its own workers, at lower cost.  Not to mention GOH, a bunch of car classes were rehabbed in-house of course; arguably the quality of some of those rebuilds was questionable (R42 CI rebuilds), but in all fairness, some of the rebuilds done by outside contractors were pretty questionable as well (R38 GE rebuilds, and that series of R36s rebuilt by Amtrak).

Not everything needs to be done by outside firms, not every cost needs to be artificially inflated (as they often are).  What you see today with the MTA and a lot of other state entities is the result of construction industry lobbying efforts in Albany.  For example, anytime politicians want a bridge replaced outright instead of repaired (Tappan Zee, Pulaski, Goethals), who do you think stands to benefit the most?  The consultants who manipulate the numbers to make a replacement look cheaper than a repair, and the guys who win the construction bids. 

[rbrome]

1 hour ago, Via Garibaldi 8 said:

Yeah, but #1, the  has stated that their expertise is NOT in construction and the only way they'd be able to gain such expertise is by hiring and paying handsomely for such talent, which for an agency that constantly cries broke ...

First, as I said, hiring the in-house talent would ultimately be cheaper. Leadership just needs to understand this and lead. 

Second, the status quo in simply unsustainable. Costs for capital projects have been rising faster than inflation. At the current rate, the MTA won't be able to afford any expansion in a decade or two. Something has to change. 

1 hour ago, Via Garibaldi 8 said:

...you can look at how it's done elsewhere all you want. New York City is like no other place when it comes to construction, ...

I absolutely reject this brand of NY Exceptionalism. I'm thinking of cities like London and Paris. They're even older, almost as dense, and have strong unions. If NYC isn't comparable to those cities on construction costs, something is seriously broken here, and I refuse to accept that as inevitable. To just throw your hands up, say NYC is unique and nothing can be done, is to guarantee our infrastructure will remain woefully inadequate. It's a great way to ensure NYC remains exceptionally shitty. 

[CenSin]

57 minutes ago, rbrome said:

NY Exceptionalism

I believe it. Exceptionally corrupt.

[Via Garibaldi 8]

1 hour ago, rbrome said:

1. First, as I said, hiring the in-house talent would ultimately be cheaper. Leadership just needs to understand this and lead. 

Second, the status quo in simply unsustainable. Costs for capital projects have been rising faster than inflation. At the current rate, the MTA won't be able to afford any expansion in a decade or two. Something has to change. 

2. I absolutely reject this brand of NY Exceptionalism. I'm thinking of cities like London and Paris. They're even older, almost as dense, and have strong unions. If NYC isn't comparable to those cities on construction costs, something is seriously broken here, and I refuse to accept that as inevitable. To just throw your hands up, say NYC is unique and nothing can be done, is to guarantee our infrastructure will remain woefully inadequate. It's a great way to ensure NYC remains exceptionally shitty. 

1. Yes, ultimately it would, but not initially, and the question would be how long would it take to achieve this? I'm not disagreeing with you on any of this, BUT at the same time, you're asking and actually expecting that the  is going to have leadership in place long enough to do any of this? LOL! This is the same agency that doesn't have an organizational chart. I mean, your vision is applaudable, but you'd have to move heaven & earth for all of this to happen and do some serious lobbying for it. You keep talking about leadership, and I keep going back to Albany because that's where the buck stops. The leadership at the  will only go in whatever direction Albany wants, more specifically the Governor. First you'd have to have some actual stability to get anything done, and we both know how often leadership changes at the .

2. You can reject it, sure. It's like me when I lived in Italy thinking that somehow certain ways of life could change if only the mafia wasn't involved in certain industries. LOL Even with the corruption that exists in Italy, things generally still get done, particularly from a construction standpoint. All I'm saying is, it would be damn difficult to do. You're talking hypotheticals and I'm simply laying out the obstacles that could potentially create issues for the  to achieve said goals, and they aren't easy to circumvent either.

 

[Benny Kanner]

On 2/5/2012 at 2:55 AM, CenSin said:

This is an article from about 2 months ago:

Source: The MTA Wants to Deny the Bronx a New Subway | Suite101.com

 

I was under the impression that a station at 125 Street and 2 Avenue wasn't possible due to the water or impediment to future extension to the Bronx.

 

Any comments?

The BMT 2nd Avenue Line should only serve the <I>, (I), , , <Y>, , {<QT>}, {(QT)}, {<YF>}, {(YF)}, {<YT>}, & {(YT)}. 

Ⓜ 125th Street <Y> {YF} {YT}
Ⓜ 116th Street  {QT}
Ⓜ 110th Street  {QT}
Ⓜ 103rd Street  {QT}
Ⓜ 96th Street  <Y> {YF} {QT} {YT}
Ⓜ 91st Street  {QT}
Ⓜ 86th Street  {QT}
Ⓜ 79th Street  {QT}
Ⓜ 72nd Street  <Y> {QT} {YF} {YT}
Ⓜ 66th Street  {QT}
Ⓜ 59th Street <I> (I) 
Ⓜ 50th Street <I> (I) 
Ⓜ 42nd Street <I> (I)  <Y> {YF} {YT}
Ⓜ 34th Street <I> (I) 
Ⓜ 28th Street <I> (I) 
Ⓜ 23rd Street <I> (I) 
Ⓜ 18th Street <I> (I) 
Ⓜ 14th Street <I> (I)  <Y> {YF} {YT}
Ⓜ Saint Marks Place <I> (I) 
Ⓜ Houston Street <I> (I) 
Ⓜ Grand Street <I> (I) 
Ⓜ Chatham Square <I> (I)  {YT}
Ⓜ Frankfort Street-Brooklyn Bridge <I> (I) 
Ⓜ Maiden Lane <I> (I) 
Ⓜ Hanover Square <I> (I)  {YT}
Ⓜ Battery Park <I> (I)

[Kamen Rider]

…1, we don’t do double letters anymore.

2: it’s an IND line

3: how much service are you shoving down it?

4: that belongs in a fantasy thread.

 

5: you responded to a post from a decade ago!

Edited November 14, 2022 by Kamen Rider