Enhanced Station Initiative

[Coney Island Av]

8 minutes ago, RR503 said:

I’m absolutely with you that stations are part of the issue. And I understand station environment matters — a little part of my gut dies every time I go to Chambers st — but I think you’re giving ESI too much credit. Sure, it takes care of component repairs too, but it does so while spending on average $15 million more than past renovations. That may sound like statistical error in this day of 12 billion dollar commuter rail stations, but multiplied across 32 projects, that’s $480 million extra dollars that taxpayers are on the hook for — and with little to show for it. No ADA. No new stairs. No new entrances. No better mezzanines. What’s most disgusting about all this though is that ESI isn’t even addressing the worst stations. Fully half of the ones chosen are not in the 100 worst stops in terms of component issues, begging the question as to why they’re being renovated.  

I agree with @RR503. I went to 53 St a few months back. And what did I see? Only the walls were renovated/replaced, and mezzanine also looked cosmetic. However, that's about it. It looks nice on the outside, but that's the only thing it does. The MTA has to consider that these renovations are pointless with all the aforementioned things (ADA, new entrances, etc) being left out. The ESI renovations, IMO, are a "f**k you" to the disabled and local residents that have to walk a lot to the nearest station. 

I also agree with his point of the stations not being the most deteriorated. For example, they propose an ESI renovation of Arthur Kill, a station that's new and only opened 1 year ago. What's the point in doing that when the station isn't going to be dilapidated at all, and it already has ADA-accessibility. Most of the 4th Av stops look like stations from the 80's or 90's at best. That's fairly recent. 

[Via Garibaldi 8]

5 minutes ago, Coney Island Av said:

I agree with @RR503. I went to 53 St a few months back. And what did I see? Only the walls were renovated/replaced, and mezzanine also looked cosmetic. However, that's about it. It looks nice on the outside, but that's the only thing it does. The MTA has to consider that these renovations are pointless with all the aforementioned things (ADA, new entrances, etc) being left out. The ESI renovations, IMO, are a "f**k you" to the disabled and local residents that have to walk a lot to the nearest station. 

I also agree with his point of the stations not being the most deteriorated. For example, they propose an ESI renovation of Arthur Kill, a station that's new and only opened 1 year ago. What's the point in doing that when the station isn't going to be dilapidated at all, and it already has ADA-accessibility. Most of the 4th Av stops look like stations from the 80's or 90's at best. That's fairly recent. 

30 - 40 years ago is not fairly recent.  It's 2018 now....

[bobtehpanda]

25 minutes ago, Coney Island Av said:

I agree with @RR503. I went to 53 St a few months back. And what did I see? Only the walls were renovated/replaced, and mezzanine also looked cosmetic. However, that's about it. It looks nice on the outside, but that's the only thing it does. The MTA has to consider that these renovations are pointless with all the aforementioned things (ADA, new entrances, etc) being left out. The ESI renovations, IMO, are a "f**k you" to the disabled and local residents that have to walk a lot to the nearest station. 

I also agree with his point of the stations not being the most deteriorated. For example, they propose an ESI renovation of Arthur Kill, a station that's new and only opened 1 year ago. What's the point in doing that when the station isn't going to be dilapidated at all, and it already has ADA-accessibility. Most of the 4th Av stops look like stations from the 80's or 90's at best. That's fairly recent. 

As a counterpoint, I'm pretty sure ESI includes waterproofing, which is a major issue throughout the subway that does contribute to extremely poor conditions and equipment failures. But yeah, the MTA has the problem of not clearly establishing criteria and posting judgements of each statements by each criteria. But a proper cost-benefit analysis process would never happen in this state.

[WestFarms36]

4 hours ago, RR503 said:

I’m absolutely with you that stations are part of the issue. And I understand station environment matters — a little part of my gut dies every time I go to Chambers st — but I think you’re giving ESI too much credit. Sure, it takes care of component repairs too, but it does so while spending on average $15 million more than past renovations. That may sound like statistical error in this day of 12 billion dollar commuter rail stations, but multiplied across 32 projects, that’s $480 million extra dollars that taxpayers are on the hook for — and with little to show for it. No ADA. No new stairs. No new entrances. No better mezzanines. What’s most disgusting about all this though is that ESI isn’t even addressing the worst stations. Fully half of the ones chosen are not in the 100 worst stops in terms of component issues, begging the question as to why they’re being renovated.  

The ADA Issue was explained in the board meeting, There is a specific ADA Program, and ESI is another Program, ESI is just station enhancement, not down to the foundation rehab. ESI is just a quick alternative to the painful 14 month long typical rehab. I understand there are things that need to be maintained, but Stations can't be let down the drain. MTA had a plan in 2005 to have all stations renovated by 2011 and they had a crisis at the time, took the choice to push it back and were stuck to what we have now, nasty disgraceful stations that look like if MTA has forgotten about their existence.

[RR503]

14 minutes ago, WestFarms36 said:

The ADA Issue was explained in the board meeting, There is a specific ADA Program, and ESI is another Program, ESI is just station enhancement, not down to the foundation rehab. ESI is just a quick alternative to the painful 14 month long typical rehab. I understand there are things that need to be maintained, but Stations can't be let down the drain. MTA had a plan in 2005 to have all stations renovated by 2011 and they had a crisis at the time, took the choice to push it back and were stuck to what we have now, nasty disgraceful stations that look like if MTA has forgotten about their existence.

Alright, let’s try this again. 

Is “the MTA does it this way” a justification for the MTA doing it that way? ADA, capacity upgrades, and cosmetic stuff should all be done at the same time. That’s called piggybacking work, and it’s something the MTA *really* needs to get better at. 

ESI as you say is largely a cosmetic treatment. It takes care of component issues, but given that half of the program’s target stops are outside the top 100 neediest stations in terms of component issues, that doesn’t seem to be the point. It seems the point is to — as a poster once pointed out here — quickly make pretty stations in areas where Cuomo, and Dems in general have electoral issues.  

And while station renovations should have a cosmetic angle, that shouldn’t be what we’re spending on stations solely to do. They need more than that. Look at the crowding issues not only at places like GCT and 14th, but also at your nearby local station that suffers from exit surges and stair bottlenecks every time a train arrives. Look at ADA compliance. Look at the number of broken things in our stations. ESI isn’t addressing really any of these issues. It’s choosing not particularly needy stations to double the renovation costs on for no good reason aside from the distribution of political goody-bags in a time when our system is suffering a crisis on many fronts. 

Once again, ESI is just poorly applied lipstick on a pig with a bad case of cardiovascular disease. 

Edited February 24, 2018 by RR503

[CenSin]

30 minutes ago, WestFarms36 said:

The ADA Issue was explained in the board meeting, There is a specific ADA Program, and ESI is another Program, ESI is just station enhancement, not down to the foundation rehab. ESI is just a quick alternative to the painful 14 month long typical rehab. I understand there are things that need to be maintained, but Stations can't be let down the drain. MTA had a plan in 2005 to have all stations renovated by 2011 and they had a crisis at the time, took the choice to push it back and were stuck to what we have now, nasty disgraceful stations that look like if MTA has forgotten about their existence.

ESI: We’re going to put this nice art sculpture right here.

ADA: We’re going to drill an elevator shaft right above the art sculpture.

King Cuomo: We need more countdown clocks! *has another installed right behind and obscured by the elevator*

 

Do people want to support rigid separation of responsibilities or common sense?

Edited February 24, 2018 by CenSin

[AlgorithmOfTruth]

Undeniably, there are stations that require urgent structural attention, e.g., the Chambers Street  train station. However, the MTA is focusing on aesthetic renovation as a prerogative to satisfy the affluent's interests. Unless service would be severely impacted as a result of construction work being performed, assignments take much longer to be completed than they necessarily should. Take for example another station on the —the 104th Street station (Manhattan-bound platform); it's approaching a year since the platform has been closed for renovations such as newly-constructed platform surface, new platform-wall paneling, and improved lighting. There's days where I pass by the station during normal weekday hours only to witness absolutely nothing being actively worked on... Sometimes I wonder if these ESI projects are being done for the sake of quieting the masses... Talk about "The Grand Illusion..."

Edited February 24, 2018 by AlgorithmOfTruth

[Around the Horn]

5 hours ago, Coney Island Av said:

I also agree with his point of the stations not being the most deteriorated. For example, they propose an ESI renovation of Arthur Kill, a station that's new and only opened 1 year ago.

Factually incorrect. Arthur Kill is brand new, built to ESI specs minus the tech gadgetry.

Edited February 24, 2018 by Around the Horn

[Mysterious2train]

12 hours ago, RR503 said:

Alright, let’s try this again. 

Is “the MTA does it this way” a justification for the MTA doing it that way? ADA, capacity upgrades, and cosmetic stuff should all be done at the same time. That’s called piggybacking work, and it’s something the MTA *really* needs to get better at. 

ESI as you say is largely a cosmetic treatment. It takes care of component issues, but given that half of the program’s target stops are outside the top 100 neediest stations in terms of component issues, that doesn’t seem to be the point. It seems the point is to — as a poster once pointed out here — quickly make pretty stations in areas where Cuomo, and Dems in general have electoral issues.  

And while station renovations should have a cosmetic angle, that shouldn’t be what we’re spending on stations solely to do. They need more than that. Look at the crowding issues not only at places like GCT and 14th, but also at your nearby local station that suffers from exit surges and stair bottlenecks every time a train arrives. Look at ADA compliance. Look at the number of broken things in our stations. ESI isn’t addressing really any of these issues. It’s choosing not particularly needy stations to double the renovation costs on for no good reason aside from the distribution of political goody-bags in a time when our system is suffering a crisis on many fronts. 

Once again, ESI is just poorly applied lipstick on a pig with a bad case of cardiovascular disease. 

Byford claims ESI stations on average have more components in need of repair than the rest of the system. He also said he wouldn't support ESI if he thought it was just cosmetic work. Granted, as a consultant I imagine you're privy to data on stations the rest of us don't have, but I'm willing to trust Byford for now. 

Also, elevator work is notoriously susceptible to delay - for example, 57 St-7 Av  and 68 St-Hunter College  have had awards of ADA contracts delayed for years (4-5 years) due to design/real estate issues. Having work on a station that needs component repairs delayed due to issues with ADA accessibility wouldn't be so good.

Quote

VCA = Voluntary Compliance Agreement (MTA's agreement to make some stations accessible) 

F = forecast 

A = awarded

http://web.mta.info/mta/news/books/pdf/180220_1000_Transit.pdf (from page 326) 

(As a matter of fact, speaking to your point about building new entrances to congested stations, the project at 68 St-Hunter College also involves building new entrances at 69th Street and Lexington Avenue, which property owners on 69th Street heavily opposed - although I guess it's not quite as pressing a need now that SAS Phase 1 is open) 

Plus, some ESI stations are close to already-accessible stations so I think they'd be a poor choice to get elevators. Given the fact that we can only make a few stations accessible at once, I'd rather see other stations (with better ridership/more important connections/far from ADA accessible stations, etc.) become accessible first.

Byford also alluded to these issues at the board meeting: 

Quote

Mr. Byford said he had spent weeks analyzing the stations slated to be enhanced and had come to understand why things like elevators were not part of the plan, explaining that some of the stations were close to accessible stations, while in other cases figuring out how to make a station compliant with the Americans with Disabilities Act would drag out the necessary work.

“To wait for perfection at every station?’’ he said.“ Some will fall into a dangerous state of disrepair, and you will fall into my scenario of, ‘yes it’s ADA-compliant but oops’” — the station would be inaccessible because it had fallen apart.

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/02/22/nyregion/subway-cosmetic-upgrades.html

(Anybody who hasn't watched the Transit committee meetings or board meetings really should - Byford's presentations are great and he's a real treat to listen to)

Maybe Byford has already fallen into the Cuomo line and is blindly following orders? It's possible, but given the goodwill he's built up, I'm willing to give him the benefit of the doubt.

Also, while Cuomo has certainly used the subway to pander, if the ESI is supposed to be a political pandering tool, it seems like it's not doing a good job given the backlash towards it from the public perception of the MTA closing down stations as service gets worse solely to make aesthetic improvements. Plus, much of NYC is reliably blue at the state level, so exactly which "areas where Cuomo, and Dems in general have electoral issues" is the ESI supposed to pander to?

11 hours ago, AlgorithmOfTruth said:

Undeniably, there are stations that require urgent structural attention, e.g., the Chambers Street  train station. However, the MTA is focusing on aesthetic renovation as a prerogative to satisfy the affluent's interests. Unless service would be severely impacted as a result of construction work being performed, assignments take much longer to be completed than they necessarily should. Take for example another station on the —the 104th Street station (Manhattan-bound platform); it's approaching a year since the platform has been closed for renovations such as newly-constructed platform surface, new platform-wall paneling, and improved lighting. There's days where I pass by the station during normal weekday hours only to witness absolutely nothing being actively worked on... Sometimes I wonder if these ESI projects are being done for the sake of quieting the masses... Talk about "The Grand Illusion..."

Construction projects taking too long is a problem that goes far beyond the ESI, so it doesn't really seem related to whether or not ESI on its own is a worthy expenditure. 104 St  is not part of the ESI anyway, so using problems with its renovation to criticize the ESI doesn't make sense. Not to mention some of the upcoming ESI stations include 145 St , 163 St , 167 St and 174-175 Sts on the , hardly used by riderbases I would call affluent. 

Edited February 24, 2018 by Mysterious2train

[LGA Link N Train]

12 hours ago, AlgorithmOfTruth said:

Undeniably, there are stations that require urgent structural attention, e.g., the Chambers Street  train station. However, the MTA is focusing on aesthetic renovation as a prerogative to satisfy the affluent's interests. Unless service would be severely impacted as a result of construction work being performed, assignments take much longer to be completed than they necessarily should. Take for example another station on the —the 104th Street station (Manhattan-bound platform); it's approaching a year since the platform has been closed for renovations such as newly-constructed platform surface, new platform-wall paneling, and improved lighting. There's days where I pass by the station during normal weekday hours only to witness absolutely nothing being actively worked on... Sometimes I wonder if these ESI projects are being done for the sake of quieting the masses... Talk about "The Grand Illusion..."

Facts. I've passed by that stationsince the summer almost every day to go to school and there were a majority of days where nothing was being done. Disgraceful is the only word I can say

[AlgorithmOfTruth]

2 hours ago, Mysterious2train said:

Byford claims ESI stations on average have more components in need of repair than the rest of the system. He also said he wouldn't support ESI if he thought it was just cosmetic work. Granted, as a consultant I imagine you're privy to data on stations the rest of us don't have, but I'm willing to trust Byford for now. 

Also, elevator work is notoriously susceptible to delay - for example, 57 St-7 Av  and 68 St-Hunter College  have had awards of ADA contracts delayed for years (4-5 years) due to design/real estate issues. Having work on a station that needs component repairs delayed due to issues with ADA accessibility wouldn't be so good.

http://web.mta.info/mta/news/books/pdf/180220_1000_Transit.pdf (from page 326) 

(As a matter of fact, speaking to your point about building new entrances to congested stations, the project at 68 St-Hunter College also involves building new entrances at 69th Street and Lexington Avenue, which property owners on 69th Street heavily opposed - although I guess it's not quite as pressing a need now that SAS Phase 1 is open) 

Plus, some ESI stations are close to already-accessible stations so I think they'd be a poor choice to get elevators. Given the fact that we can only make a few stations accessible at once, I'd rather see other stations (with better ridership/more important connections/far from ADA accessible stations, etc.) become accessible first.

Byford also alluded to these issues at the board meeting: 

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/02/22/nyregion/subway-cosmetic-upgrades.html

(Anybody who hasn't watched the Transit committee meetings or board meetings really should - Byford's presentations are great and he's a real treat to listen to)

Maybe Byford has already fallen into the Cuomo line and is blindly following orders? It's possible, but given the goodwill he's built up, I'm willing to give him the benefit of the doubt.

Also, while Cuomo has certainly used the subway to pander, if the ESI is supposed to be a political pandering tool, it seems like it's not doing a good job given the backlash towards it from the public perception of the MTA closing down stations as service gets worse solely to make aesthetic improvements. Plus, much of NYC is reliably blue at the state level, so exactly which "areas where Cuomo, and Dems in general have electoral issues" is the ESI supposed to pander to?

Construction projects taking too long is a problem that goes far beyond the ESI, so it doesn't really seem related to whether or not ESI on its own is a worthy expenditure. 104 St  is not part of the ESI anyway, so using problems with its renovation to criticize the ESI doesn't make sense. Not to mention some of the upcoming ESI stations include 145 St , 163 St , 167 St and 174-175 Sts on the , hardly used by riderbases I would call affluent. 

The demographics and corresponding income level at the stations you mentioned on the , , and  lines are not dependent on those stations receiving plans for ESI overhaul. I'm not going to contaminate the integrity of this thread with politics, however, do know that final decisions are made by the "elite" who wouldn't set foot in said stations unless they were hopelessly lost. It takes nothing more than them approving plans for these stations on paper. No longer am I going to entertain the power of politics here. Carry on.

[Lawrence St]

I haven't even noticed that 39th and 30th Avenue were close when I rode the last week, I actually thought that those stations were old towers they were dismantiling. 

[bobtehpanda]

10 hours ago, Mysterious2train said:

Also, while Cuomo has certainly used the subway to pander, if the ESI is supposed to be a political pandering tool, it seems like it's not doing a good job given the backlash towards it from the public perception of the MTA closing down stations as service gets worse solely to make aesthetic improvements. Plus, much of NYC is reliably blue at the state level, so exactly which "areas where Cuomo, and Dems in general have electoral issues" is the ESI supposed to pander to?

NYC is heavily blue, yes, but he needs to pull in enough New York City voters to balance out the red votes upstate. People will not turn out if they're dissatisfied.

[RR503]

22 hours ago, Mysterious2train said:

Byford claims ESI stations on average have more components in need of repair than the rest of the system. He also said he wouldn't support ESI if he thought it was just cosmetic work. Granted, as a consultant I imagine you're privy to data on stations the rest of us don't have, but I'm willing to trust Byford for now. 

 

Don't. Here's a copy of the data online:

https://cbcny.org/research/subway-station-condition-map

For posterity's sake, I downloaded this data, filtered out the duplicates in excel, and then copied the top 100 most decayed into a separate sheet. There, I matched them with ESI projects. 14 ESI projects (44%) address stations in that top 100 group. The other 18 do not. 

FWIW the 14 that do are: 

Prospect Ave  , 

Bay Ridge Ave ,

Van Siclen Ave , 

167 St ,

3 Av-138 St  ,

Brook Ave ,

163rd St-Amsterdam Ave ,

Cathedral Parkway ,

23 St  ,

145 St ,

30 Ave ,

36 Ave  ,

Broadway ,

39 Ave .

_____________________________________________________

Make of this what you will. To me, it reeks of political goody-bagging. 

Edited February 25, 2018 by RR503

[R68OnBroadway]

Here are some stations that are actually in need of ESI (I would only accept these as part of ESI if elevators or ramps were also installed). Please note that when I mean ESI I mean a major renovation including waterproofing, structural reinforcement, etc.

Chambers St

Bowery  

Most Concourse stations minus 155th, 161st and Tremont

7th Av

15th St

Fort Hamilton Parkway

Broadway  

West 4th Street

14th Street  (  ESI could be done during the shutdown) 

3rd Av-138th Street  

138th Street-Grand Concourse  

149th Street-Grand Concourse  

Bedford Av  

Chambers St  

Most the stations on the Cuomo list imo just need a repaint and some scrubbing.

 

Edited February 25, 2018 by R68OnBroadway
added Chambers St IRT

[Around the Horn]

I'd imagine that most of these stations that everyone is naming would be part of a future ESI phase 2 or 3...

 

They really dropped the ball on ADA, I will agree with that critique... 

[WestFarms36]

7 hours ago, R68OnBroadway said:

Here are some stations that are actually in need of ESI (I would only accept these as part of ESI if elevators or ramps were also installed). Please note that when I mean ESI I mean a major renovation including waterproofing, structural reinforcement, etc.

Chambers St

Bowery  

Most Concourse stations minus 155th, 161st and Tremont

7th Av

15th St

Fort Hamilton Parkway

Broadway  

West 4th Street

14th Street  (  ESI could be done during the shutdown) 

3rd Av-138th Street  

138th Street-Grand Concourse  

149th Street-Grand Concourse  

Bedford Av  

Chambers St  

Most the stations on the Cuomo list imo just need a repaint and some scrubbing.

 

Chambers St cannot qualify for ESI because the issue at Chambers St goes way beyond the scope of ESI, and would need a down to the foundation reconstruction and would also last way more than 6 months under reconstruction.

[R68OnBroadway]

21 minutes ago, WestFarms36 said:

Chambers St cannot qualify for ESI because the issue at Chambers St goes way beyond the scope of ESI, and would need a down to the foundation reconstruction and would also last way more than 6 months under reconstruction.

Regardless of that, I would still want to get it renovated ASAP. I would connect the SB and NB express tracks to the current tracks north of Fulton to allow for one-platform operation at Chambers, thus closing down the outer island platforms and the eastern side platforms for other use. The tracks would be left in place in case of storage, but under this plan only the center platform would remain open.

[kosciusko]

4 minutes ago, Vtrain said:

Can someone post pictures on what the 53rd St/Lexington Av station looks like now after it was closed the christmas week for work.

I've been there a few times since and I haven't noticed anything different.

 

IIRC stations selected for ESI are determined not by condition alone but by a mix of ridership, condition, and passenger circulation, which explains some of the odd picks.

[Around the Horn]

That wasn't ESI and there wasn't any station work involved. It was all repair to the tunnel and track cleaning.

[Mysterious2train]

On 2/24/2018 at 9:46 PM, bobtehpanda said:

NYC is heavily blue, yes, but he needs to pull in enough New York City voters to balance out the red votes upstate. People will not turn out if they're dissatisfied.

 

On 2/25/2018 at 9:45 AM, RR503 said:

Don't. Here's a copy of the data online:

https://cbcny.org/research/subway-station-condition-map

For posterity's sake, I downloaded this data, filtered out the duplicates in excel, and then copied the top 100 most decayed into a separate sheet. There, I matched them with ESI projects. 14 ESI projects (44%) address stations in that top 100 group. The other 18 do not. 

FWIW the 14 that do are: 

Prospect Ave  , 

Bay Ridge Ave ,

Van Siclen Ave , 

167 St ,

3 Av-138 St  ,

Brook Ave ,

163rd St-Amsterdam Ave ,

Cathedral Parkway ,

23 St  ,

145 St ,

30 Ave ,

36 Ave  ,

Broadway ,

39 Ave .

_____________________________________________________

Make of this what you will. To me, it reeks of political goody-bagging. 

Alright, thanks for the data. It is definitely suspect that some decrepit stations which already are going to get rehabbed this capital program (like the  stations in Queens near the top of the list) weren't added to the ESI. I can accept that the list of the stations was picked with pandering to certain interests in mind and that Byford fell in line. But again, if the ESI is supposed to be a way to win over the riding public at-large, it seems like it's doing a terrible job. 

Edited February 27, 2018 by Mysterious2train

[NewFlyer 230]

On 2/24/2018 at 12:30 AM, AlgorithmOfTruth said:

Undeniably, there are stations that require urgent structural attention, e.g., the Chambers Street  train station. However, the MTA is focusing on aesthetic renovation as a prerogative to satisfy the affluent's interests. Unless service would be severely impacted as a result of construction work being performed, assignments take much longer to be completed than they necessarily should. Take for example another station on the —the 104th Street station (Manhattan-bound platform); it's approaching a year since the platform has been closed for renovations such as newly-constructed platform surface, new platform-wall paneling, and improved lighting. There's days where I pass by the station during normal weekday hours only to witness absolutely nothing being actively worked on... Sometimes I wonder if these ESI projects are being done for the sake of quieting the masses... Talk about "The Grand Illusion..."

121st on the  just opened on the Manhattan bound side the day before the new year even though it was suppose to be completed during the summer. I can’t believe it took them so long to open those stations and 104th is still not done. I think part of the reason why it took so long is because most of the Queens station on the J line see low ridership so I would assume to the MTA it wasn’t a huge concern to complete those stations as soon as possible. Also the people who live in the areas around those two station aren’t as vocal about different issues so there certainly wasn’t any pressure for the MTA to get those stations opened up. Now that the Jamaica Center platform at 121st is closed I guarantee you that it will take another whole year to complete. 

 

 

 

For some some reason I can’t write on the bottom of the quote so I’ll write my comment here. I heard that the  was suppose to get an addition entrance at 69th street along with the elevator. However resident in the area shot that idea down because they don’t want an entrance on their block and I believe they said it would affect  the quality of their block which is just selfish right there. 

As a student of Hunter college that additional entrance would definitely be useful. Also if I came from 71st Street for example, I have to walk down to 68 Street and if I was transferring to the  or  at 53rd Street I have to walk to the back of the platform which is a PITA in my opinion because it’s this unnecessary backtracking being done at a station that has enough ridership to justify another entrance.  I’m hoping in the future, stations that have only one entrance at the extreme end of the platform will have another secondary entrance built to avoid extra walking and unnecessary backtracking.

On 2/24/2018 at 11:15 AM, Mysterious2train said:

Byford claims ESI stations on average have more components in need of repair than the rest of the system. He also said he wouldn't support ESI if he thought it was just cosmetic work. Granted, as a consultant I imagine you're privy to data on stations the rest of us don't have, but I'm willing to trust Byford for now. 

Also, elevator work is notoriously susceptible to delay - for example, 57 St-7 Av  and 68 St-Hunter College  have had awards of ADA contracts delayed for years (4-5 years) due to design/real estate issues. Having work on a station that needs component repairs delayed due to issues with ADA accessibility wouldn't be so good.

http://web.mta.info/mta/news/books/pdf/180220_1000_Transit.pdf (from page 326) 

(As a matter of fact, speaking to your point about building new entrances to congested stations, the project at 68 St-Hunter College also involves building new entrances at 69th Street and Lexington Avenue, which property owners on 69th Street heavily opposed - although I guess it's not quite as pressing a need now that SAS Phase 1 is open) 

Plus, some ESI stations are close to already-accessible stations so I think they'd be a poor choice to get elevators. Given the fact that we can only make a few stations accessible at once, I'd rather see other stations (with better ridership/more important connections/far from ADA accessible stations, etc.) become accessible first.

 

[Via Garibaldi 8]

16 minutes ago, NewFlyer 230 said:

For some some reason I can’t write on the bottom of the quote so I’ll write my comment here. I heard that the  was suppose to get an addition entrance at 69th street along with the elevator. However resident in the area shot that idea down because they don’t want an entrance on their block and I believe they said it would affect  the quality of their block which is just selfish right there. 

As a student of Hunter college that additional entrance would definitely be useful. Also if I came from 71st Street for example, I have to walk down to 68 Street and if I was transferring to the  or  at 53rd Street I have to walk to the back of the platform which is a PITA in my opinion because it’s this unnecessary backtracking being done at a station that has enough ridership to justify another entrance.  I’m hoping in the future, stations that have only one entrance at the extreme end of the platform will have another secondary entrance built to avoid extra walking and unnecessary backtracking.

You can call it selfish, but they have a right to voice their concern.  You're not the one that lives there and would have to put up with the consequences of that entrance.  I attend a lot of these meetings and was at one recently and after hearing the concerns, I completely understand where they are coming from.  Once you graduate or transfer from Hunter, you won't have to put up with 68th street, but they will for years to come.  I myself will likely be an owner of a residence in the near future, and I will do everything to protect my investment.  These people have put in thousands to millions of dollars for their apartments, not including the yearly taxes and all of the other fees that they have to pay.  They certainly have a right to be concerned about their investment and quality of life.  Sometimes these projects come about and they sound great.  Let's build it!  I find that these engineers sometimes lack commonsense and sometimes they just don't think about certain things because they don't live in the neighborhood.  

Edited February 28, 2018 by Via Garibaldi 8

[WestFarms36]

1 hour ago, Via Garibaldi 8 said:

You can call it selfish, but they have a right to voice their concern.  You're not the one that lives there and would have to put up with the consequences of that entrance.  I attend a lot of these meetings and was at one recently and after hearing the concerns, I completely understand where they are coming from.  Once you graduate or transfer from Hunter, you won't have to put up with 68th street, but they will for years to come.  I myself will likely be an owner of a residence in the near future, and I will do everything to protect my investment.  These people have put in thousands to millions of dollars for their apartments, not including the yearly taxes and all of the other fees that they have to pay.  They certainly have a right to be concerned about their investment and quality of life.  Sometimes these projects come about and they sound great.  Let's build it!  I find that these engineers sometimes lack commonsense and sometimes they just don't think about certain things because they don't live in the neighborhood.  

It would help if the were more transparent to its customers and specify the reasons of why accessibiliy/additional entrance projects get delayed, and or may not happen, e.g. 'The ADA Accessibility/additional staircase(s) at _____________ Station is being delayed/may be postponed/not occur for _________________ reasons, we will still keep this location in further study to find othet solutions to mitigate such issue.' Instead of dodging questions or making budgetary excuses as they are known to make. Most Elevated lines can get elevators and theres' no excuse to say that they have no control of streets, thats stupid for them to say, they could coordinate with the DOT and make Curb extensions if Feasible and Necessary to facilitate the Installation of an Elevator at those stations, while on other elevated stations it obviously be impossible due to the fact that theres buildings adjacent on both sides and a narrow street below and narrow sidewalk.

[Via Garibaldi 8]

1 minute ago, WestFarms36 said:

It would help if the were more transparent to its customers and specify the reasons of why accessibiliy/additional entrance projects get delayed, and or may not happen, e.g. 'The ADA Accessibility/additional staircase(s) at _____________ Station is being delayed/may be postponed/not occur for _________________ reasons, we will still keep this location in further study to find othet solutions to mitigate such issue.' Instead of dodging questions or making budgetary excuses as they are known to make. Most Elevated lines can get elevators and theres' no excuse to say that they have no control of streets, thats stupid for them to say, they could coordinate with the DOT and make Curb extensions if Feasible and Necessary to facilitate the Installation of an Elevator at those stations, while on other elevated stations it obviously be impossible due to the fact that theres buildings adjacent on both sides and a narrow street below and narrow sidewalk.

This is a main problem with most projects.  The people that have to put up with the construction want to know what is going on (and they have a right to know).  Sometimes plans change, and the community is left out of the picture.  The  has been known to on various occasions say one thing and do another, so there is definitely a sense of mistrust.