Second Avenue Subway Discussion

[Sparen of Iria]

Hmm... if the tunneling costs so little, I'm really wondering why they were so against installing express tunnels. As is, they might have to underpin all existing stations to install express tracks... If they even *want* that extra 30 TPH...

[bobtehpanda]

Hmm... if the tunneling costs so little, I'm really wondering why they were so against installing express tunnels. As is, they might have to underpin all existing stations to install express tracks... If they even *want* that extra 30 TPH...

 

The issue is building express tunnels now is, well, why would you need them now? What on earth could you possibly connect express tracks to as part of Phase I? At most you could only really skip two stops (three if express tracks mean splitting 72nd into two stations). Sixth Avenue did not have express tracks when it was built, either.

 

Express tunnels also requires digging the stations deeper or wider, and since those are the most expensive line items in the budget, that might not necessarily be desirable.

[Sparen of Iria]

You have a point about the cost. But they're not even leaving provisions.

 

And the way I see it, the express would stop at 72, 116, and then continue towards the Bronx. As is, with only local tracks, a Bronx extension is basically shelved because sending one service (probably the ) to the Bronx would halve the TPH available at Park/125 and any foreseeable crosstown.

[bobtehpanda]

You have a point about the cost. But they're not even leaving provisions.

 

And the way I see it, the express would stop at 72, 116, and then continue towards the Bronx. As is, with only local tracks, a Bronx extension is basically shelved because sending one service (probably the ) to the Bronx would halve the TPH available at Park/125 and any foreseeable crosstown.

 

A crosstown does not warrant a full 30 TPH. 15 TPH would be a significant capacity boost to the MTA already, since trains carry significantly more people than buses and the trains would also be much faster than the current slog on 125 St. You could have one 15 TPH branch serving the 125th St corridor, and one 15 TPH branch serving either the rail line by the Bruckner or Third/Webster/Park Avs in the Bronx. Where two tracks split off to the , you could include another 15 TPH service from Queens assuming capacity is built in Queens for it, which is a total of 45 new TPH in the outer parts of the system.

 

What would provisioning from 96th St to 72nd St, which is the current scope of construction, even look like? Extension to 125th is not even in the cards yet given the current Capital Plan funding situation, and even then it would be a very long time before extension to the Bronx (since that would require at least Phase III or IV, which is even further into the future.)

[Sparen of Iria]

Well, you definitely have a point about funding for Phase 2 simply not being there...

 

Part of me is just worried that they're not going to build the other half of the 63 St connector, and it'll fire back in our faces when we have a capacity issue south of 2 Av/55 St sometime in the future. As for the terminal, I wonder how much it would cost just to have a one-station extension from Forest Hills via Local simply to be able to turn more trains? And yeah, it's a stupid idea since the MTA ditched the ROW for the IND World's Fair line and all, but Forest Hills simply can't turn all the trains it gets.

[bobtehpanda]

Well, you definitely have a point about funding for Phase 2 simply not being there...

 

Part of me is just worried that they're not going to build the other half of the 63 St connector, and it'll fire back in our faces when we have a capacity issue south of 2 Av/55 St sometime in the future. As for the terminal, I wonder how much it would cost just to have a one-station extension from Forest Hills via Local simply to be able to turn more trains? And yeah, it's a stupid idea since the MTA ditched the ROW for the IND World's Fair line and all, but Forest Hills simply can't turn all the trains it gets.

 

Track capacity doesn't really figure into the issues at Forest Hills - the issue there is passenger fumigation, which puts a limit on how many trains can go through that one terminal. To actually solve it you would either need to change fumigation procedures (not happening due to staff safety issues) or divert one of the lines separating there. It just so happens that there is an abandoned rail-right of way that goes southeast to Howard Beach that would be up for the job, but there's no money in the bank for that right now, let alone political will.

[CenSin]

Track capacity doesn't really figure into the issues at Forest Hills - the issue there is passenger fumigation, which puts a limit on how many trains can go through that one terminal. To actually solve it you would either need to change fumigation procedures (not happening due to staff safety issues) or divert one of the lines separating there. It just so happens that there is an abandoned rail-right of way that goes southeast to Howard Beach that would be up for the job, but there's no money in the bank for that right now, let alone political will.

Looking at the track map, there’s also the ability to store 3 trains at a time directly east of the station. Further east, another 3. And then there’s the yard. Fumigation really is the most limiting factor here.

[Sparen of Iria]

That's why we need some kind of alternate terminal that's not Jamaica 179...

But this is starting to go a little off topic, I guess. 

 

Why exactly is the cost of constructing the stations so high? Would building it with columns save a couple million dollars? I'm just really curious why the project is so damn expensive. I don't think it's just the contractors ripping off the MTA either.

[bobtehpanda]

That's why we need some kind of alternate terminal that's not Jamaica 179...

 

But this is starting to go a little off topic, I guess. 

 

Why exactly is the cost of constructing the stations so high? Would building it with columns save a couple million dollars? I'm just really curious why the project is so damn expensive. I don't think it's just the contractors ripping off the MTA either.

 

There's a lot of reasons for why MTA projects in general are expensive, ranging from inefficient work rules, to the byzantine bidding process that discourages more competition, to the fact that MTA is required to pick lowest-bid (even though later on there are cost overruns because it was understated to win the bid), to the strange fact that Anglophone countries for whatever reason tend to have significantly higher costs than their peers.

 

As for the stations specifically, it's because the MTA is committed to blasting out giant caverns for full mezzanines (most likely). Full mezzanines are also part of what made the IND expensive, and caverns tend to be really expensive affairs. In contrast, look at how constrained a London tube station is:

 

[Sparen of Iria]

There's a lot of reasons for why MTA projects in general are expensive, ranging from inefficient work rules, to the byzantine bidding process that discourages more competition, to the fact that MTA is required to pick lowest-bid (even though later on there are cost overruns because it was understated to win the bid), to the strange fact that Anglophone countries for whatever reason tend to have significantly higher costs than their peers.

If only we could *do* something about this as citizens and taxpayers.

[N6 Limited]

There's a lot of reasons for why MTA projects in general are expensive, ranging from inefficient work rules, to the byzantine bidding process that discourages more competition, to the fact that MTA is required to pick lowest-bid (even though later on there are cost overruns because it was understated to win the bid), to the strange fact that Anglophone countries for whatever reason tend to have significantly higher costs than their peers.

 

There is a LOT more they can/(could have gotten) get accomplished if they keep their projects and costs reasonable.

[trainfanrod]

i keep looking at the proposed line i think that its only going to be successful if it goes in another boro brooklyn or bx because everyone just going to crowd the

[Sparen of Iria]

i keep looking at the proposed line i think that its only going to be successful if it goes in another boro brooklyn or bx because everyone just going to crowd the

Of course. Show the MTA some money and maybe an IND 3rd Av Line or a connection to the IND Fulton Line will happen.

[trainfanrod]

Of course. Show the MTA some money and maybe an IND 3rd Av Line or a connection to the IND Fulton Line will happen.

i was thinking that maybe they could extend the train from houston to South 4th st in williamsburg since its built

[Sparen of Iria]

i was thinking that maybe they could extend the train from houston to South 4th st in williamsburg since its built

Once again, if money appears for a IND S4St/Utica Av line, that would be amazing. But the MTA has bigger problems than this...

[Union Tpke]

Once again, if money appears for a IND S4St/Utica Av line, that would be amazing. But the MTA has bigger problems than this...

I think it makes more sense to go via Grand Avenue to relieve crowds from the .

[bobtehpanda]

What was built decades ago may not be appropriate today (that is to say, the center of gravity in Williamsburg doesn't appear to be by the anymore, but by the .)

[Wallyhorse]

What was built decades ago may not be appropriate today (that is to say, the center of gravity in Williamsburg doesn't appear to be by the anymore, but by the .)

That's now, but the way things are going, that expansion is likely over time to spill over to where the is, especially once the Domino Sugar project is done.  

 

As for the SAS, I still think the best expansion would be via a new Schermerhorn Street tunnel that would take the into Brooklyn with the current Transit Museum (Court Street) being turned back into an active subway stop and then becoming the Fulton Street Local at Hoyt-Schermerhorn while the and go express on Fulton (and we would have about 40 years to find a new spot for the Transit Museum because it will take at least that long for the SAS to get down there).  By the time that were to happen, that part of Brooklyn could very well be built up enough to warrant such.

[bobtehpanda]

That's now, but the way things are going, that expansion is likely over time to spill over to where the is, especially once the Domino Sugar project is done.

 

Bedford Avenue currently has about triple the ridership of Marcy Avenue. It would take a lot more than just one development project for the to even catch up. Also, Domino Sugar is closer to Bedford Avenue than it is to Marcy Avenue anyways, so my point still stands.

[CenSin]

As for the SAS, I still think the best expansion would be via a new Schermerhorn Street tunnel that would take the into Brooklyn with the current Transit Museum (Court Street) being turned back into an active subway stop and then becoming the Fulton Street Local at Hoyt-Schermerhorn while the and go express on Fulton (and we would have about 40 years to find a new spot for the Transit Museum because it will take at least that long for the SAS to get down there).  By the time that were to happen, that part of Brooklyn could very well be built up enough to warrant such.

The importance of the Transit Museum is a drop in the bucket compared to the future transportation needs of the region. They will move it if they need to, especially since the other choice is to build an expensive replacement station, and/or tunnel another half a mile to make the connection.

[Wallyhorse]

The importance of the Transit Museum is a drop in the bucket compared to the future transportation needs of the region. They will move it if they need to, especially since the other choice is to build an expensive replacement station, and/or tunnel another half a mile to make the connection.

Exactly, and that is the most logical place to expand the into Brooklyn, having it go to Euclid (and extended to Lefferts late nights) while the , which would be an express in Brooklyn becomes the full-time Lefferts line and the becomes the full-time Rockaway line (to both Far Rockaway and Rockaway Park with some trains short-turning at Howard Beach-JFK and the current only operating late nights).

[Trainmaster5]

Exactly, and that is the most logical place to expand the into Brooklyn, having it go to Euclid (and extended to Lefferts late nights) while the , which would be an express in Brooklyn becomes the full-time Lefferts line and the becomes the full-time Rockaway line (to both Far Rockaway and Rockaway Park with some trains short-turning at Howard Beach-JFK and the current only operating late nights).

Wallyhorse I'm going to make it simple for all involved .IF the were to use the existing trackage in Brooklyn the would be the Fulton local to Lefferts at all times.Any train passing through the Court St (museum) station is automatically a local in Brooklyn. I'm sure the Richmond Hill riders would hate that idea but my plan would eliminate excess switch use and save the for Brooklyn and Manhattan use instead. Matter of fact your idea has 3 expresses converging at Euclid Avenue , dual trains and the .. Suppose I cut back the to its old terminal at WTC and keep it out of Brooklyn entirely? The would take it's place instead. Of course the Richmond Hill folks would lose their one seat express run but I'm only trying to eliminate excessive switch use and excessive mileage on the . My proposal is (partially) in jest but knowing how the thinks and how unfunded this train phase is I'll throw it out here for comment. Pro or con, have at it. Carry on.

[BronxBombers]

Wallyhorse I'm going to make it simple for all involved .IF the were to use the existing trackage in Brooklyn the would be the Fulton local to Lefferts at all times.Any train passing through the Court St (museum) station is automatically a local in Brooklyn. I'm sure the Richmond Hill riders would hate that idea but my plan would eliminate excess switch use and save the for Brooklyn and Manhattan use instead. Matter of fact your idea has 3 expresses converging at Euclid Avenue , dual trains and the .. Suppose I cut back the to its old terminal at WTC and keep it out of Brooklyn entirely? The would take it's place instead. Of course the Richmond Hill folks would lose their one seat express run but I'm only trying to eliminate excessive switch use and excessive mileage on the . My proposal is (partially) in jest but knowing how the thinks and how unfunded this train phase is I'll throw it out here for comment. Pro or con, have at it. Carry on.

 

 

I think that's what he meant. The would run express along Fulton Street. While the runs local to Euclid Avenue. The would use the Rockaway Branch at all times, while the would terminate at Lefferts Blvd. I like that idea better, it would eliminate confusion on the train. 

 

But instead of using the museum, my proposal would be to use the Montague Tunnel, stop at Court St and build a smaller tunnel to connect Court St to the outer tracks at Hoyt St.

Edited July 3, 2015 by BronxBombers

[Sparen of Iria]

I think that's what he meant. The would run express along Fulton Street. While the runs local to Euclid Avenue. The would use the Rockaway Branch at all times, while the would terminate at Lefferts Blvd. I like that idea better, it would eliminate confusion on the train. 

 

But instead of using the museum, my proposal would be to use the Montague Tunnel, stop at Court St and build a smaller tunnel to connect Court St to the outer tracks at Hoyt St.

 

And how would the use the Montague tunnel? Would you demolish half of the Bowery Station and take away J train riders' transfer spot at Fulton St? Or would you have the continue to Hanover and then plug into Montague?

[Wallyhorse]

I think that's what he meant. The would run express along Fulton Street. While the runs local to Euclid Avenue. The would use the Rockaway Branch at all times, while the would terminate at Lefferts Blvd. I like that idea better, it would eliminate confusion on the train. 

 

But instead of using the museum, my proposal would be to use the Montague Tunnel, stop at Court St and build a smaller tunnel to connect Court St to the outer tracks at Hoyt St.

That is interesting because especially if you also built a 125th Street Crosstown (extending Phase 2 all the way across) with a connection to the 8th Avenue line, it would give some operational flexibility to send the Fulton Street line trains when needed via the SAS and then back on the 8th Avenue line after 125th and also send the Fulton Street trains when needed via Broadway as well as SAS trains via 4th Avenue.  

 

That said, the main idea is to end the split by having the by having ALL trains operate on the Rockaway branch (most trains to either Far Rockaway or Rockaway Park with some trains short-turning at Howard Beach-JFK) while the becomes the full-time Lefferts Express (while remaining as an 8th Avenue local and the replacing the late nights, eliminating the Lefferts Shuttle since the would be extended there).  The current Transit Museum to me makes the most sense to have a new tunnel go to with that as it would give riders along Fulton Street east side access.