Second Avenue Subway Discussion

[Javier]

In a less harsh way:

 

NO for to 96 Street.

[BronxBombers]

The idea is, the going to 96th/2nd would be NIGHTS and WEEKENDS ONLY when there is not as much subway traffic as a rule.  The main purpose would be to have it run to midtown at all times while in this case also supplementing the when the isn't running as much.  The UES's dense population, especially east of Lexington Avenue and even more east of 2nd Avenue warrants doing such.

 

And the connections are why the SAS should go all the way across 125th Street (stopping where it would connect to all of the other lines across 125), possibly with a connection to the 8th Avenue line there that would mainly be for G.O.'s (and also trains for events at Yankee Stadium) but also to allow for in the future a full-time Bronx SAS via the Concourse Line.

 

You would think that the UES is densely populated only because the ridership on the Lexington Avenue line is high. It is the only line serving that neighborhood. Imagine the 7th Avenue line only serving the Upper West Side, it would be the same story. I would say both the UES & UWS would have the same population. The doesn't need to serve 2nd Avenue. I think the could handle it. It's only 3 stations, the is the Lex line 2 blocks away, and the a SBS route above it.

Edited March 19, 2015 by BronxBombers

[Union Tpke]

I personally believe that Phase 3 should go ahead of Phase 2, because it provides a new trunk line, which will be needed for additional service.

I would have 4 tracks from 63 to 42nd, so that additional trains can terminate on the center tracks at 42nd. The line would connect up with the Nassau St Line and the BMT Jamaica Line. Then J and Z trains would be rerouted over 2nd Avenue,

I would have the J terminate at 96th and the Z to 42nd. The T would operate from 96th to 9th Avenue on the West End.

[RollOver]

Why? The Lex is nearby from SAS. Once they have enough cars to supply the (let's say about on a 5 minute headway or 8 to 10 minute headway), it would help ease crowding and delays on the Lex. Why make the / longer and why have them terminate at two different places for?

[Lance]

*sigh*Just stop. There will NEVER be an train that will go to 96 Street, no matter how "helpful" you think it will be. The only way 6 avenue will see 2 avenue service during nights and weekends is when the Broadway line is forced to have a G.O. that affects the .

^THIS.

 

Why do you keep pushing this Wallyhorse? How many times does everyone here have to tell you this isn't the '80s? The MTA does not operate routes with wildly different terminals depending on the day like that anymore. Do you know why? It's confusing to the riders, it's confusing to the employees and the sign-makers have to write an essay to convey varying service patterns.

 

And again, if any line were to get additional service, it would not be during the off-hours. It would during the times it'd see the most ridership, which is during the rush hours and weekday midday hours.

[MTA Dude]

I personally believe that Phase 3 should go ahead of Phase 2, because it provides a new trunk line, which will be needed for additional service.

I would have 4 tracks from 63 to 42nd, so that additional trains can terminate on the center tracks at 42nd. The line would connect up with the Nassau St Line and the BMT Jamaica Line. Then J and Z trains would be rerouted over 2nd Avenue,

I would have the J terminate at 96th and the Z to 42nd. The T would operate from 96th to 9th Avenue on the West End.

 

Without Phase 2, SAS is literally almost useless. UES needs the extra service. The problem isn't coming from the south, it's the north. You have to connect it to Lex, otherwise SAS won't be much of a use, as Bronxians will continue to crowd Lex.

[Javier]

And I assume Phase 2 can't be modified to end at 86 Street on the Lex?

[MTA Dude]

And I assume Phase 2 can't be modified to end at 86 Street on the Lex?

 

Lex won't last! They somehow have to connect it to 125th St. Maybe stop right outside Lex and have the west end connect to Lex?

[RollOver]

Erm, wouldn't extending SAS to two more stops in the Bronx at 3 Av-138 St with a free transfer to the and 3 Av-149 St with a free transfer to the be worth it? That way, the two SAS tracks wouldn't have to turn sharp from 2 Av north to 125 St west. The two SAS would just simply stay straight into the Bronx without making any curves at all. I prefer this over the transfer at 125 St-Lex anyday.

Edited March 20, 2015 by RollOver

[MysteriousBtrain]

Erm, wouldn't extending SAS to two more stops in the Bronx at 3 Av-138 St with a free transfer to the and 3 Av-149 St with a free transfer to the be worth it? That way, the two SAS tracks wouldn't have to turn sharp from 2 Av north to 125 St west. The two SAS would just simply stay straight into the Bronx without making any curves at all. I prefer this over the transfer at 125 St-Lex anyday.

I think the main reason for the 125 street terminal was because of..... well you know.

Actually, having the 2 avenue line end at 149 Street isn't a bad idea. In fact, that was what one of the original plans were so the 3 avenue el can be cut from Manhattan.

[Wallyhorse]

^THIS.

 

Why do you keep pushing this Wallyhorse? How many times does everyone here have to tell you this isn't the '80s? The MTA does not operate routes with wildly different terminals depending on the day like that anymore. Do you know why? It's confusing to the riders, it's confusing to the employees and the sign-makers have to write an essay to convey varying service patterns.

 

And again, if any line were to get additional service, it would not be during the off-hours. It would during the times it'd see the most ridership, which is during the rush hours and weekday midday hours.

The main purpose was to supplement the and have the operate on its MAIN 6th Avenue route (to 47th-50th) at all times.  Ideally, I would have the go to 71-Continental if not all times at least 19/7, but if they don't want to do that, 96th/2nd would be an alternative (57th/6th and Columbus Circle would be others in late nights, but the idea here was to avoid backing up other lines).

 

And as far as the 80's, people did not get confused then by different routes depending on time of day.  People then paid attention, and as one who heavily rode the subways then (and really had to know the routes due to my job), I saw people much more confused with the buses than subways in those days.  You were expected to pay attention, and my way is a return to that (and if people complain, I would make it clear my way rewards people who pay attention and stay alert).  I was expected to do that then and the idea is to reward those who are smart about traveling.

 

 

Erm, wouldn't extending SAS to two more stops in the Bronx at 3 Av-138 St with a free transfer to the and 3 Av-149 St with a free transfer to the be worth it? That way, the two SAS tracks wouldn't have to turn sharp from 2 Av north to 125 St west. The two SAS would just simply stay straight into the Bronx without making any curves at all. I prefer this over the transfer at 125 St-Lex anyday.

This would be smarter, but I think elected officials might think otherwise, mainly because those from the can't transfer to the SAS from either of the other stations.   If you could then somehow have the SAS run to 161 so patrons from the and can transfer in The Bronx, then I think this would be more palatable.

 

[CenSin]

And as far as the 80's, people did not get confused then by different routes depending on time of day.  People then paid attention, and as one who heavily rode the subways then (and really had to know the routes due to my job), I saw people much more confused with the buses than subways in those days.  You were expected to pay attention, and my way is a return to that (and if people complain, I would make it clear my way rewards people who pay attention and stay alert).  I was expected to do that then and the idea is to reward those who are smart about traveling.

Forget about paying attention. The goal is simplicity. Did you not read that part about having to write an essay to explain all the different service patterns on the signs? Simplicity not only benefits the stupid people; it also benefits smart people. It turns minutes of deliberation into split-second decisions. If the went to two places depending on the time of day, I'd have to look at my watch first and consult the timetable. Maybe I'd end up catching a late that was destined for Forest Hills even though the timetable suggests that all of them go to the Upper East Side after a certain time. Or maybe I might be on an train that was headed for Forest Hills when the train starts running late and train supervision decides to pull the rug out from under me by rerouting the train to the Upper East Side at the last minute to reconcile with the schedule. I'd be left at 47–50 Streets–Rockefeller Center with the choice of taking the or —neither of which will stop at the local stations along Queens Boulevard, but will both offer a transfer to a local train that does (making it a two-transfer ride).

 

And why do you insist on calling them both even though they are radically different? Why not call the Astoria–Broadway–Brighton–Coney Island and Astoria–Broadway–Sea Beach–Coney Island routes both then?

 

You seem to take a perverse enjoyment in making things complicated like pumping Jamaica–179 Street full of trains at the slightest provocation or jamming Broadway–Lafayette Street and the Chrystie Street connector with trains that don't belong there. Why? Because it's orgasmic to see a via the Jamaica line? Because every nook and cranny in the subway system needs to be fulled with revenue trains? Forget about the passengers for a moment and think about the messes that supervisors and train operators would have to clean up after these reroutes.

 

 

That aside, I actually do support sending another route up there if the line proves popular—just not with the complexity of overloading a single letter with multiple possibilities.

Erm, wouldn't extending SAS to two more stops in the Bronx at 3 Av-138 St with a free transfer to the and 3 Av-149 St with a free transfer to the be worth it? That way, the two SAS tracks wouldn't have to turn sharp from 2 Av north to 125 St west. The two SAS would just simply stay straight into the Bronx without making any curves at all. I prefer this over the transfer at 125 St-Lex anyday.

This was the original idea, and the most efficient way to extend the 2 Avenue line. No curves, and no half-assed line. As mentioned at the very beginning of this thread, 125 Street as currently proposed is basically a cop-out; it's an excuse to not build any further into the Bronx because the transfer at 125 Street already does the job. If the MTA allows it to happen, we'll basically wait centuries more before any Bronx extension.

Edited March 20, 2015 by CenSin

[bobtehpanda]

Forget about paying attention. The goal is simplicity. Did you not read that part about having to write an essay to explain all the different service patterns on the signs? Simplicity not only benefits the stupid people; it also benefits smart people. It turns minutes of deliberation into split-second decisions. If the went to two places depending on the time of day, I'd have to look at my watch first and consult the timetable. Maybe I'd end up catching a late that was destined for Forest Hills even though the timetable suggests that all of them go to the Upper East Side after a certain time. Or maybe I might be on an train that was headed for Forest Hills when the train starts running late and train supervision decides to pull the rug out from under me by rerouting the train to the Upper East Side at the last minute to reconcile with the schedule. I'd be left at 47–50 Streets–Rockefeller Center with the choice of taking the or —neither of which will stop at the local stations along Queens Boulevard, but will both offer a transfer to a local train that does (making it a two-transfer ride).

 

And why do you insist on calling them both even though they are radically different? Why not call the Astoria–Broadway–Brighton–Coney Island and Astoria–Broadway–Sea Beach–Coney Island routes both then?

 

You seem to take a perverse enjoyment in making things complicated like pumping Jamaica–179 Street full of trains at the slightest provocation or jamming Broadway–Lafayette Street and the Chrystie Street connector with trains that don't belong there. Why? Because it's orgasmic to see a via the Jamaica line? Because every nook and cranny in the subway system needs to be fulled with revenue trains? Forget about the passengers for a moment and think about the messes that supervisors and train operators would have to clean up after these reroutes.

 

 

That aside, I actually do support sending another route up there if the line proves popular—just not with the complexity of overloading a single letter with multiple possibilities.

 

This was the original idea, and the most efficient way to extend the 2 Avenue line. No curves, and no half-assed line. As mentioned at the very beginning of this thread, 125 Street as currently proposed is basically a cop-out; it's an excuse to not build any further into the Bronx because the transfer at 125 Street already does the job. If the MTA allows it to happen, we'll basically wait centuries more before any Bronx extension.

 

It wasn't really the original idea (unless you want to go all the way back to 1929, in which case the line is also six tracks). The 1970s plan, which is basically what the current plan is, had a terminus at 125/2nd. It's not a particularly good idea, since it's both one of the first places to flood in Manhattan according to the flood zone map, and the utility of the station is also questionable given that 125/2nd is also the location of the Triboro onramps, which really limits the development potential of the site (and with billion-dollar stations, we've gotta make every penny count)

Erm, wouldn't extending SAS to two more stops in the Bronx at 3 Av-138 St with a free transfer to the and 3 Av-149 St with a free transfer to the be worth it? That way, the two SAS tracks wouldn't have to turn sharp from 2 Av north to 125 St west. The two SAS would just simply stay straight into the Bronx without making any curves at all. I prefer this over the transfer at 125 St-Lex anyday.

 

Underwater tunnels are, for a variety of reasons, generally more expensive, and keep in mind that would be a longer tunneling distance that would be entirely new tunnel.

[Wallyhorse]

Forget about paying attention. The goal is simplicity. Did you not read that part about having to write an essay to explain all the different service patterns on the signs? Simplicity not only benefits the stupid people; it also benefits smart people. It turns minutes of deliberation into split-second decisions. If the went to two places depending on the time of day, I'd have to look at my watch first and consult the timetable. Maybe I'd end up catching a late that was destined for Forest Hills even though the timetable suggests that all of them go to the Upper East Side after a certain time. Or maybe I might be on an train that was headed for Forest Hills when the train starts running late and train supervision decides to pull the rug out from under me by rerouting the train to the Upper East Side at the last minute to reconcile with the schedule. I'd be left at 47–50 Streets–Rockefeller Center with the choice of taking the or —neither of which will stop at the local stations along Queens Boulevard, but will both offer a transfer to a local train that does (making it a two-transfer ride).

 

And why do you insist on calling them both even though they are radically different? Why not call the Astoria–Broadway–Brighton–Coney Island and Astoria–Broadway–Sea Beach–Coney Island routes both then?

 

You seem to take a perverse enjoyment in making things complicated like pumping Jamaica–179 Street full of trains at the slightest provocation or jamming Broadway–Lafayette Street and the Chrystie Street connector with trains that don't belong there. Why? Because it's orgasmic to see a via the Jamaica line? Because every nook and cranny in the subway system needs to be fulled with revenue trains? Forget about the passengers for a moment and think about the messes that supervisors and train operators would have to clean up after these reroutes.

 

 

That aside, I actually do support sending another route up there if the line proves popular—just not with the complexity of overloading a single letter with multiple possibilities.

 

This was the original idea, and the most efficient way to extend the 2 Avenue line. No curves, and no half-assed line. As mentioned at the very beginning of this thread, 125 Street as currently proposed is basically a cop-out; it's an excuse to not build any further into the Bronx because the transfer at 125 Street already does the job. If the MTA allows it to happen, we'll basically wait centuries more before any Bronx extension.

It's not enjoyment.  As said, in this case it more has to do with the making the a full-time line on 6th Avenue so Broadway-Brooklyn riders (in an area that is growing and will continue to grow) have full-time midtown service.  As said, ideally the line would go full-time to 71-Continental but if the doesn't want to do that but DOES want to have service run full-time on 6th Avenue, that was the best way to do it without clogging up other lines.

[MysteriousBtrain]

It's not enjoyment. As said, in this case it more has to do with the making the a full-time line on 6th Avenue so Broadway-Brooklyn riders (in an area that is growing and will continue to grow) have full-time midtown service. As said, ideally the line would go full-time to 71-Continental but if the doesn't want to do that but DOES want to have service run full-time on 6th Avenue, that was the best way to do it without clogging up other lines.

First you say extend the to supplement the , now you say to give full time midtown service to the on 6 avenue.

Once again, NO SERVICE TO 96 STREET. We already pointed out why. The best way to extend service to midtown in a "cheap" way is to have it end at Queens Plaza. This actually would prove to be better than the 96 street plan because 53 street service via 6 Avenue can get revived on the weekend and would be used more than if it went to 96 street.

Edited March 20, 2015 by MysteriousBtrain

[Wallyhorse]

First you say extend the to supplement the , now you say to give full time midtown service to the on 6 avenue.

Once again, NO SERVICE TO 96 STREET. We already pointed out why. The best way to extend service to midtown in a "cheap" way is to have it end at Queens Plaza. This actually would prove to be better than the 96 street plan because 53 street service via 6 Avenue can get revived on the weekend and would be used more than if it went to 96 street.

Actually, QP is the easiest, but I thought that was not an option due to potential interference with other lines, which I thought was why the is not extended there.

[MysteriousBtrain]

Actually, QP is the easiest, but I thought that was not an option due to potential interference with other lines, which I thought was why the is not extended there.

The could cause problems, but since the shares tracks with the , not much would be disturbed.

[Sparen of Iria]

At Queens Plaza, the G is on the outer platforms and would have to wrong rail or do some kind of unholy movement in order to switch to the other track. The M is in the middle tracks in one of the directions.

[Gong Gahou]

The M is in the middle tracks in one of the directions.

In MysteriousBtrain's scenario, M trains will occupy both middle tracks should Queens Plaza become a terminal for it.

[Grand Concourse]

 

True, although I doubt the MTA would be willing to send it to 149th instead of 125 (though it would be significantly better)

Ideally, yes, but that means building a new river tunnel and adding more expense. The line isn't even getting a full commitment to go past 72nd st going south to at least 14th st or Houston let alone ready for an extension north into the Bronx especially when the main focus is to get riders in Manhattan off the 4/5/6 and to take the Q instead.

 

Erm, wouldn't extending SAS to two more stops in the Bronx at 3 Av-138 St with a free transfer to the and 3 Av-149 St with a free transfer to the be worth it? That way, the two SAS tracks wouldn't have to turn sharp from 2 Av north to 125 St west. The two SAS would just simply stay straight into the Bronx without making any curves at all. I prefer this over the transfer at 125 St-Lex anyday.

I understand what you are getting at, but other than helping out 2 train riders from having another option of getting to Manhattan or 6 train riders getting a less roundabout way of getting to the west side with a Q to 2 transfer, it still won't justify the expense given how phase 3 and 4 aren't even committed to and phase 2 on a bubble. And as mysteriousbtrain pointed out: 125th-Lex sorta does just that. Basically if a person is going to the Bronx, they are probably staying on the 4/5/6 anyway. The Q will more or less be for those on the east side so they can stay off the Lex and have their own line with more direct access to the west side of midtown.

 

I personally believe that Phase 3 should go ahead of Phase 2, because it provides a new trunk line, which will be needed for additional service.

I would have 4 tracks from 63 to 42nd, so that additional trains can terminate on the center tracks at 42nd. The line would connect up with the Nassau St Line and the BMT Jamaica Line. Then J and Z trains would be rerouted over 2nd Avenue,

I would have the J terminate at 96th and the Z to 42nd. The T would operate from 96th to 9th Avenue on the West End.

Understandable, but ending at 96th doesn't help many people. Phase 2 is what will make the SAS a stubway to a semi useful line. I do agree phase 3 is also needed, but phase 2 can be done now, why start over again when the street is already dug up and then seal it off again for later? Don't 'half ass' a project in the middle when it should be done completely. There's no back up for the Lex north of 96th. At least to 125th if something goes down on Lex, riders can have a backup in the Q and take that down and get back to Lexington av at 59th or Union Sq.

Phase 3 as important as it is, is not really that 'needed' given by midtown you already have several other trunk lines in the area already. 

 

As for your J/Z idea, I dunno. 8 car trains aren't really ideal and it remains to be seen if the line will be 4 tracks wide at that segment. Plus with a connection from the QBL at 63rd st, it would make more sense to have a line there connect to 2nd av and run south. [Perhaps as part of another project to build a new Queens trunk line to help ease the burden on the QBL, but that's another subject.]

I still sorta agree with the idea to annex the Nassau/center st line for the SAS and cut out the actual phase 4 plan down water st. The main issue would be how to get a 10 car train to work on platforms that at best can hold a 9 car train. [ie close off a car or have barriers to prevent people from exiting into an empty space vs a platform.]

Edited March 22, 2015 by Grand Concourse

[RollOver]

Without Phase 2, SAS is literally almost useless. UES needs the extra service. The problem isn't coming from the south, it's the north. You have to connect it to Lex, otherwise SAS won't be much of a use, as Bronxians will continue to crowd Lex.

 

So after re-reading this post a few more times, I came to the conclusion that you're exaggerating a little bit by saying that "Bronxians will continue to crowd Lex". What else do you expect on the , and ? You think that Jerome, Dyre and Pelham riders - including most (not many or all) Crown Heights, Brownsville, East New York, and Flatbush residents - want to transfer at whatever Lexington Avenue station that has a free transfer to SAS when they can just stay on their respective lines? Of course not. Unless they work where near SAS is, it wouldn't be that bad and it would certainly not be close to useless neither.

 

The problem is the Upper East Side, as Grand Concourse pointed out above. The can (or will) perfectly handle everybody that are coming from east of 2 Avenue without any problem at all, as they work or live by it where they can simply walk towards it instead of walking pass it. That way, it would greatly ease crowding on the entire Lexington Avenue line. I can promise you that much. Also, anybody that's coming from west of Lexington Avenue will continue using the aforementioned subway corridor of the same name, as they work or live by it where they can just simply walk towards it instead of walking pass it.

 

Now you understand why the Lexington Avenue Line is almost always crowded throughout the Upper East Side area? That's where the comes in. Now, imagine the serving the entire Upper West Side area without the .

[Quill Depot]

I think people are getting ahead of themselves. When we see how Phase 1 is doing then we can contemplate future extensions. The MTA will never tunnel to the Bronx for SAS.

[Sparen of Iria]

Phase 1 should be a success as long as the MTA gets it done on time, on budget, and the escalators are still (hopefully) working at the end of the first week.

[dunee88]

The problem is the Upper East Side, as Grand Concourse pointed out above. The can (or will) perfectly handle everybody that are coming from east of 2 Avenue without any problem at all, as they work or live by it where they can simply walk towards it instead of walking pass it. That way, it would greatly ease crowding on the entire Lexington Avenue line. I can promise you that much. Also, anybody that's coming from west of Lexington Avenue will continue using the aforementioned subway corridor of the same name, as they work or live by it where they can just simply walk towards it instead of walking pass it.

 

Now you understand why the Lexington Avenue Line is almost always crowded throughout the Upper East Side area? That's where the comes in. Now, imagine the serving the entire Upper West Side area without the .

Agreed. My wife and many of her Co workers work at York and 71st. They usually bus or take a cab over to lex. The 2nd Ave line will help in saving that extra transfer or cab fare. Lex can handle from 3rd Ave over the central park while 2nd Ave can handle 4rd Ave over to York and fdr.

[Wallyhorse]

I think people are getting ahead of themselves. When we see how Phase 1 is doing then we can contemplate future extensions. The MTA will never tunnel to the Bronx for SAS.

Maybe, but especially with Columbia's expansion going all the way across 125th Street makes a lot of sense, especially if it allows for transfers to ALL of the other lines across 125 AND provides a connection to the 8th Avenue line that would mainly be used for G.O.s/special event trains.