MTA Retail Tunnels

[Porter]

Since I'm not allowed to 'necropost' by bumping perfectly good threads, I'll make a new one instead.

 

Would it be feasible for the MTA to generate income by reopening some of their larger corridors, most notably their Sixth Avenue tunnel?

 

http://forgotten-ny.com/2015/09/under-6th-avenue/

 

I know that the 'Gimbels' tunnel was recently planned to be renovated, but that unfortunately fell through due to the city's pyrgrophobia. However, while comparatively less useful as a transit corridor, the Sixth Avenue tunnel is absolutely enormous and could easily be fashioned into a money-making shopping strip, especially considering its prime location.

 

http://forgotten-ny.com/2015/09/under-6th-avenue/

 

This seems like massive potential being wasted!

[bobtehpanda]

Since I'm not allowed to 'necropost' by bumping perfectly good threads, I'll make a new one instead.

 

Would it be feasible for the MTA to generate income by reopening some of their larger corridors, most notably their Sixth Avenue tunnel?

 

http://forgotten-ny.com/2015/09/under-6th-avenue/

 

I know that the 'Gimbels' tunnel was recently planned to be renovated, but that unfortunately fell through due to the city's pyrgrophobia. However, while comparatively less useful as a transit corridor, the Sixth Avenue tunnel is absolutely enormous and could easily be fashioned into a money-making shopping strip, especially considering its prime location.

 

http://forgotten-ny.com/2015/09/under-6th-avenue/

 

This seems like massive potential being wasted!

 

I am pretty sure that most of those tunnels are actually managed by private property owners, so they would have to give the OK.

[Around the Horn]

I could see the 6th Avenue tunnel turned into another location for TurnStyle. The one in Coumbus Circle has, by all accounts, been a roaring success.

[Via Garibaldi 8]

I could see the 6th Avenue tunnel turned into another location for TurnStyle. The one in Coumbus Circle has, by all accounts, been a roaring success.

I pass Columbus Circle almost daily, and I have yet to go downstairs and have a look.  Something about eating food with the subway nearby skeeves me out. I do get food from Grand Central, but that's on the main concourse or the lower level, not where the subway is located.

[Around the Horn]

I pass Columbus Circle almost daily, and I have yet to go downstairs and have a look.  Something about eating food with the subway nearby skeeves me out. I do get food from Grand Central, but that's on the main concourse or the lower level, not where the subway is located.

 

Its not just food...there's also little storefronts down there.

[Via Garibaldi 8]

Its not just food...there's also little storefronts down there.

Oh yeah I've seen those similar to the ones at Grand Central and Times Square.  They don't seem that popular though.  I mean I've never seen anyone go into those stores to shop, so maybe they need to find more popular retailers for the space.  I mean yeah, you would think with all of those people passing by it would be popular, but most people are running to or from the train.  I mean Grand Central (the parts that I do go to eat food) is BEAUTIFUL.  Who wouldn't shop there?  Meanwhile, with the subway right there in Columbus Circle, I just don't get the same vibe and desire to purchase there.

[bobtehpanda]

I pass Columbus Circle almost daily, and I have yet to go downstairs and have a look.  Something about eating food with the subway nearby skeeves me out. I do get food from Grand Central, but that's on the main concourse or the lower level, not where the subway is located.

 

Is it really any different from the Rockefeller Center complex when you think about it?

[Via Garibaldi 8]

Is it really any different from the Rockefeller Center complex when you think about it?

I wouldn't know... I try to avoid that one as well. lol Not exactly impressed with it (what I've saw anyway) to be honest.  The subway station certainly is horrendous and reeks of urine.  It's an embrassment to have a subway station look like there in the heart of Midtown.  In fact the stench is so annoying that I sometimes will use the Bryant Park station which is a tad better since it was renovated recently.

[Porter]

I am pretty sure that most of those tunnels are actually managed by private property owners, so they would have to give the OK.

 

The Gimbels tunnel, yes. However, who on earth would own the private property directly beneath Sixth Avenue spanning from Herald Square to Bryant Park if not the , the very company that possessed the sole authority to close the corridor in the first place.

 

I could see the 6th Avenue tunnel turned into another location for TurnStyle. The one in Coumbus Circle has, by all accounts, been a roaring success.

 

Yes, exactly like that.

 

I wouldn't know... I try to avoid that one as well. lol Not exactly impressed with it (what I've saw anyway) to be honest.  The subway station certainly is horrendous and reeks of urine.  It's an embrassment to have a subway station look like there in the heart of Midtown.  In fact the stench is so annoying that I sometimes will use the Bryant Park station which is a tad better since it was renovated recently.

 

This Sixth Avenue tunnel isn't really that close to the tracks themselves. I only worry about the slope in some sections, but that hasn't stopped the Dey Street Concourse from springing up retail kiosks.

[MHV9218]

Frankly, they should be reopening all of these. 14th Street, Gimbels, everything. Security cameras are not what they were before and the city graduated from the 1980s. The same goes for reopening entrances and exits (I'm looking at you, Crosstown and Jamaica Lines) and restoring some of the functionality slowly chipped away over the years. I've already given up hope on the crossunders stupidly removed from most IRT stations.

[Kamen Rider]

Since I'm not allowed to 'necropost' by bumping perfectly good threads, I'll make a new one instead.

 

 

Threads that are two or three months old are not exactly perfectly good. On some really strict forums, reopening even a month old thread can get you banned.

[Porter]

Threads that are two or three months old are not exactly perfectly good. On some really strict forums, reopening even a month old thread can get you banned.

 

I never understood this. A relevant topic is a relevant topic. Is it because members don't want to read everything that came before, which might answer their questions and provide context for the topic? If bumping threads is so undesirable, why not place a one-month timer on inactive threads, and automatically lock the thread once it expires?

[Fresh Pond]

 

 

I never understood this. A relevant topic is a relevant topic. Is it because members don't want to read everything that came before, which might answer their questions and provide context for the topic? If bumping threads is so undesirable, why not place a one-month timer on inactive threads, and automatically lock the thread once it expires?

Generally speaking, once threads ran their course, they get buried under new threads and active threads so locking inactive threads makes no sense. Once in a while, there are threads that get buried, and surface up once again with relevant information again, and the cycle repeats.

 

Then you have people who bring up old threads and don't even contribute to them and just to bump up their post count, that's when we have to come in and actually lock them.

[Porter]

Generally speaking, once threads ran their course, they get buried under new threads and active threads so locking inactive threads makes no sense. Once in a while, there are threads that get buried, and surface up once again with relevant information again, and the cycle repeats.

 

Then you have people who bring up old threads and don't even contribute to them and just to bump up their post count, that's when we have to come in and actually lock them.

 

So, it's not really about bumping in and of itself, but rather bumping without a contribution that warrants the bump?

[Lance]

Precisely. Personally, I'd prefer someone bump an old thread if there's new, pertinent information to be added over starting a new thread that will likely rehash the same conversation or talking points from the original.

[Porter]

a new thread that will likely rehash the same conversation or talking points from the original.

 

I'm new here, so I sometimes fall into the trap of asking questions or starting conversations that have long since been discussed to death here (including, but not limited to: "Why did the fail? Will the be next?", "Why can't the Lefferts Boulevard and Far Rockaway trains have different bullets?", "Which sections of the SAS were built in the '70s?", "Why are the Cortlandt and South Ferry stations taking so damned long to rebuild?", "Why not make a 125th Street service?", "Why not extend the SAS into the Bronx?", "Why don't station signs show late night and/or weekend service lines that don't otherwise serve the station?", "Why don't we have bullet icons for many of the discontinued post-1985-reform lines on these forums?", and now "Why not reopen the old MTA pedestrian passageways?").

 

Old threads sometimes serve that purpose, but I'm afraid to excavate them if all I'm doing is continuing a conversation and not offering a revelation.

[Fresh Pond]

I'm new here, so I sometimes fall into the trap of asking questions or starting conversations that have long since been discussed to death here (including, but not limited to: "Why did the fail? Will the be next?", "Why can't the Lefferts Boulevard and Far Rockaway trains have different bullets?", "Which sections of the SAS were built in the '70s?", "Why are the Cortlandt and South Ferry stations taking so damned long to rebuild?", "Why not make a 125th Street service?", "Why not extend the SAS into the Bronx?", "Why don't station signs show late night and/or weekend service lines that don't otherwise serve the station?", "Why don't we have bullet icons for many of the discontinued post-1985-reform lines on these forums?", and now "Why not reopen the old MTA pedestrian passageways?").

 

Old threads sometimes serve that purpose, but I'm afraid to excavate them if all I'm doing is continuing a conversation and not offering a revelation.

And that's what the Random Thoughts Thread is for

[INDman]

Many of these passage ways cant be reopened as they have been turned into office/crew room/store room space. The 6th Ave passage has been re-purposed for signal/relay room space with the upcoming implementation of CBTC on the 6th Ave corridor.

[Union Tpke]

Do you know how many trains per hour would be able to be run via Sixth Avenue with the installation of CBTC?

[Around the Horn]

Do you know how many trains per hour would be able to be run via Sixth Avenue with the installation of CBTC?

 

I would assume its the same TPH capacity as the or for each track. I'd guess 30-35 TPH for express or local tracks and 60-70 total in each direction...

[Union Tpke]

I would assume its the same TPH capacity as the or for each track. I'd guess 30-35 TPH for express or local tracks and 60-70 total in each direction...

 

With CBTC on Queens Boulevard, F service could finally be increased. Good express service on the Culver Line would be possible.

[Around the Horn]

With CBTC on Queens Boulevard, F service could finally be increased. Good express service on the Culver Line would be possible.

 

I'm still of the opinion that the Culver Local service should also be the 2nd Avenue-Queens Bypass service . Both the and would have 15 tph in the rush...

[Union Tpke]

I'm still of the opinion that the Culver Local service should also be the 2nd Avenue-Queens Bypass service . Both the and would have 15 tph in the rush...

 

I think that the Second Avenue – Queens Bypass service should run via Utica Avenue. The Bronx – Second Avenue service, in my opinion, should run via Fulton Street local.