Enhanced Station Initiative

[LGA Link N Train]

3 hours ago, The Rider Rep said:

Will 145th be opened up to handle 10 cars?

I wish

[GreatOne2k]

On 6/22/2018 at 6:53 PM, Union Tpke said:

30th and 36th on the Astoria Line are really nice. I checked them out earlier today. 39th needs work badly.

The historical dual names are now eliminated in those stations. Looks like MTA has reversed their previous stance on keeping historical names with renovations (like on the ).

 

[Lance]

The person who was in favor of the historical names is probably not at the MTA any longer. Also, those secondary names serve no purpose, nor are they relevant anywhere. The only reason why Rawson, Lowery and Bliss stuck around was because some Sunnyside residents complained when they disappeared from the signs.

[CenSin]

30 minutes ago, Lance said:

The person who was in favor of the historical names is probably not at the MTA any longer. Also, those secondary names serve no purpose, nor are they relevant anywhere. The only reason why Rawson, Lowery and Bliss stuck around was because some Sunnyside residents complained when they disappeared from the signs.

Historical monikers would be really useful for street or avenue names that existed in multiple locations but in different neighbors. 7 Avenue comes to mind.

[Lance]

Couldn't you achieve the same results by including the cross street in the name, like they do for 7 Av-53 St?

[CenSin]

13 hours ago, Lance said:

Couldn't you achieve the same results by including the cross street in the name, like they do for 7 Av-53 St?

Neighborhood names have a nicer feel; they’re very much like those on the LIRR. But I understand that the density of stations makes it inelegant at times. There could be 3 stations along a stretch that lie within a neighborhood, and having one station bear the moniker could be misleading, while assigning it to all 3 stations would make the names unwieldy.

The best solution would probably be to reassign the stations to some other nearby streets where possible—especially if an exit serves that street. If that is not possible, naming the cross street should be considered. If the line that the station is on follows a street for several consecutive stations, cross streets should be avoided to eliminate repetition (Smith–9 Streets → Smith Street, 4 Avenue–9 Street → 4 Avenue). If duplicates still remain, consider a neighborhood moniker. Duplicates are ignored if a routes that contains them can be ruled out; for example, 103 Street on the Flushing and Lexington Avenue lines can never exist together on any possible route (in regular service or as a reroute) and so do not need to be contrasted. But these do:

• 7 Avenue () → Broadway–7 Avenue
• 7 Avenue () → Park Place
• 7 Avenue () → 7 Avenue
• 86 Street () → 86 Street
• 86 Street () → 86 Street
• 86 Street () → Gravesend–86 Street
• 86 Street () → Bay Ridge–86 Street
• Bay Ridge–95 Street () → Fort Hamilton–95 Street
• 36 Street () → 38 Avenue
• 36 Street () → 36 Street
• 50 Street () → 49 Street
• 50 Street () → 50 Street

[Lance]

2 hours ago, CenSin said:

• 7 Avenue () → Park Place
• 36 Street () → 38 Avenue 
• 50 Street () → 49 Street

Wouldn't that create more confusion? The large mosaic signs would be very inconsistent with the Helvetica white-on-black signs and I can't see Transit updating the mosaics at these stations to represent the new naming scheme. After all, the signs at Court Sq-23 St continue to read 23 St-Ely Av even though the latter name was never correct when the station opened in the late '30s. At least there however, the 23rd Street portion continues to be correct, unlike 149 St-Grand Concourse and 138 Street where the original names Mott Av and Mott Haven respectively have been covered over with standard signage. I don't think it's worth it to go through such an effort for such a trivial matter.

2 hours ago, CenSin said:

• 86 Street () → Gravesend–86 Street
• 86 Street () → Bay Ridge–86 Street

I think they only give neighborhood designations to terminal stops only. When the used to terminate at 2 Avenue, the station gained the "Lower East Side" portion of the name. Before and after the life of the , the station was only known as 2 Avenue.

2 hours ago, CenSin said:

Bay Ridge–95 Street () → Fort Hamilton–95 Street

Oddly enough, this station used to be known as 95 St-Fort Hamilton. It wasn't until around the time of the '95 Manhattan Bridge service changes where it changed from Fort Hamilton to Bay Ridge. At least going by my map scans.

[Around the Horn]

Fort Hamilton, as a neighborhood, got obliterated by the Verrazano/Gowanus Expressway. I guess it took them until '95 to update that...

[CenSin]

37 minutes ago, Lance said:

I think they only give neighborhood designations to terminal stops only. When the used to terminate at 2 Avenue, the station gained the "Lower East Side" portion of the name. Before and after the life of the , the station was only known as 2 Avenue.

They seem to have neighborhood/landmark monikers at non-terminal stations like 63 Drive–Rego Park, 82 Street–Jackson Heights, and 15 Street–Prospect Park. Apparently, the MTA has no hard rules on where they are used.

43 minutes ago, Lance said:

Wouldn't that create more confusion? The large mosaic signs would be very inconsistent with the Helvetica white-on-black signs and I can't see Transit updating the mosaics at these stations to represent the new naming scheme. After all, the signs at Court Sq-23 St continue to read 23 St-Ely Av even though the latter name was never correct when the station opened in the late '30s. At least there however, the 23rd Street portion continues to be correct, unlike 149 St-Grand Concourse and 138 Street where the original names Mott Av and Mott Haven respectively have been covered over with standard signage. I don't think it's worth it to go through such an effort for such a trivial matter.

Cover over the old signage is what I think they should do. If they get around to adopt-a-station, they should have those changes made as part of the process of rennovation.

[Lance]

3 hours ago, CenSin said:

They seem to have neighborhood/landmark monikers at non-terminal stations like 63 Drive–Rego Park, 82 Street–Jackson Heights, and 15 Street–Prospect Park. Apparently, the MTA has no hard rules on where they are used.

Generally, they are used for terminals. There are obviously instances where that rule doesn't apply for one reason or another. I don't feel it's worthwhile to add more neighborhood designations to the stations unless they're points of interest, but that's just a personal preference as I don't like extra-long station names. However, I'd much rather this over the alternative you mentioned.

3 hours ago, CenSin said:

Cover over the old signage is what I think they should do. If they get around to adopt-a-station, they should have those changes made as part of the process of rennovation.

But why? How many riders are confused by this seemingly miniscule problem that it would be worth the expense to either cover over or replace the existing mosaics? This seems like a waste of already limited funds to solve a non-issue.

[AlgorithmOfTruth]

1 hour ago, Lance said:

Generally, they are used for terminals. There are obviously instances where that rule doesn't apply for one reason or another. I don't feel it's worthwhile to add more neighborhood designations to the stations unless they're points of interest, but that's just a personal preference as I don't like extra-long station names. However, I'd much rather this over the alternative you mentioned.

But why? How many riders are confused by this seemingly miniscule problem that it would be worth the expense to either cover over or replace the existing mosaics? This seems like a waste of already limited funds to solve a non-issue.

Not only that, but the MTA omits ordinals when it comes to their geographical naming system. For example, "3 Avenue–138 Street" on the  is used over "3rd Avenue–138th Street." You wouldn't say "Three Avenue–One Hundred Thirty Eight Street," you'd say "Third Avenue–One Hundred Thirty Eighth Street." A subtle difference, but the former is incorrect. Ordinals are used whenever objects occur in order, not at random. Here, the objects under consideration are physical roads, which are substantiated by their ordering. For example, when you fail to include the "th" from 138th Street, you're asserting that 138th Street isn't considered part of a set of roads that occur in succession, which is incorrect, as it does. Consider 149th Street (another major thoroughfare in The Bronx) which is definitively located north of 138th Street. An exception is made when the road's designation lacks a numerical representation, like "Tremont Avenue," which doesn't require an ordinal, as there are no numerals present in the street's name. This doesn't mean that Tremont Avenue isn't subject to having a definite location relative to other roads that occur in succession though. For example, Tremont Avenue is definitively located south of Fordham Road—it lacks an ordinal due to the fact it's designation doesn't include a numeral. You could drop the ordinals off street names to save on ink and space, but at a technical level, it's linguistically erroneous. Inquire in pursuit of knowledge, always.

Edited July 3, 2018 by AlgorithmOfTruth

[R68OnBroadway]

Few name changes I can think of:

7th Av  to 7th Av-Prospect Heights

Park Place  to Park-Prospect Place

7th Av  to 7th Avenue-53rd Street

86th Street  to Bay Ridge-86th Street

86th Street  to Gravesend-86th Street

36th Street  to 36th Street-Northern Blvd

59th Street  to 59th Street-Sunset Park

Bay 50th Street   to Avenue X

50th Street  to 49th-50th Streets

[LGA Link N Train]

15 minutes ago, R68OnBroadway said:

36th Street  to 36th Street-Northern Blvd

no. Instead, it should stay as 36 Street, or it could be 36 St - LIC North, or something like that.

OR  you could do this:

- Greenwood - 36 Street

[Coney Island Av]

I would change the following stations' names:

7 Av  to 7 Av-53 St 

7 Av  to Park Slope-7 Av

86 St  to 85-86 Sts

36 St  to Sunset Park-36 St

Pelham Pkwy  to Laconia Av-Pelham Pkwy 

Gun Hill Rd  to E Gun Hill Rd-Seymour Av

Astoria-Ditmars Blvd  to Ditmars Blvd 

Woodhaven Blvd  to Woodhaven Blvd-Queens Mall 

Jamaica Center-Parsons/Archer  to Jamaica Center-Parsons Blvd

Sutphin Blvd-Archer Av-JFK  to Sutphin Blvd-Archer Av

Park Place  to Prospect-Park Place

Broadway  to Broadway-Union Av

Bergen St  to Bergen St-6 Av

There are so many stations that either share and/or have the same name that I cannot list them all. These are the ones I can think of, but for ones like Utica Av  and Crown Heights-Utica Av  should be left alone. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[ABOGbrooklyn]

All of you guys are wrong, neighborhood names only exist for terminals you can't put 

36th Street - Sunset Park etc..

[CenSin]

2 hours ago, ABOGbrooklyn said:

All of you guys are wrong, neighborhood names only exist for terminals you can't put 

36th Street - Sunset Park etc..

Remember to make sure you’re not wrong before saying that.

20 hours ago, CenSin said:

They seem to have neighborhood/landmark monikers at non-terminal stations like 63 Drive–Rego Park, 82 Street–Jackson Heights, and 15 Street–Prospect Park. Apparently, the MTA has no hard rules on where they are used.

 

16 hours ago, Lance said:

that's just a personal preference

That’s right—just personal preference. I’d rather historical artifacts be damned; we’re running a large transit system, not a museum or art gallery. But I also not saying that it’s a priority fix. These changes can ride on top of other work. And as you said before, station names change. And I don’t find those changes to be rare.

The IND had the sense to name their massive Greenwich Village station West 4 Street to disambiguate it from another planned station in another borough (South 4 Street). One wonders why this did not happen when they started integrating the BMT and IND tracks.

 

11 hours ago, Coney Island Av said:

There are so many stations that either share and/or have the same name that I cannot list them all. These are the ones I can think of, but for ones like Utica Av  and Crown Heights-Utica Av  should be left alone

And the only ones that qualify for a name change are those with the possibility of ending up on the same route current or future. Stations like 28 Street don’t need disambiguation since there are no possible/reasonable routes that would have a run stop at more than one of them.

[LGA Link N Train]

14 hours ago, Coney Island Av said:

Woodhaven Blvd  to Woodhaven Blvd-Queens Mall

Actually, that station does have an alternate name called Slaterey Plaza though no one calls it that 

 

6 hours ago, ABOGbrooklyn said:

All of you guys are wrong, neighborhood names only exist for terminals you can't put 

36th Street - Sunset Park etc..

No, not true at all. While Forest Hills may be a terminal stop for the locals, it's still used as a through station. Besides, you forgot that these exist:

63 Drive - Rego Park

Forest Hills - 71 Avenue

Kew Gardens - Union. Turnpike

(Briarwood -Van Wyck) (As I like to call it)

The list just goes on and therefore there's nothing wrong with through stations having neighborhood names

[Around the Horn]

It appears that as part of an Empire State Development grant for the south Bronx, 161 St-Yankee Stadium will be renovated

From Crains:

Quote

The East 161st Street-Yankee Stadium subway stop will get a $227,000 facelift as part of a $10 million Cuomo administration grant for the South Bronx, officials said Tuesday.

The “modern, attractive gateway to the Bronx,” as Empire State Development head Howard Zemsky put it, may be the most noticeable to transit-going baseball fans but it is the smallest local project to receive attention from the administration’s Downtown Revitalization Initiative.

Sounds like a similar ESI project like the Penn Station stations...

[P3F]

1 hour ago, Around the Horn said:

It appears that as part of an Empire State Development grant for the south Bronx, 161 St-Yankee Stadium will be renovated

From Crains:

Sounds like a similar ESI project like the Penn Station stations...

Haven't both levels been rehabbed recently?

[Lance]

Yep, back in '05. I'm glad we keep focusing on these same stations and not the ones literally falling apart (looking at you 3 Av-138 St).

[Via Garibaldi 8]

33 minutes ago, Lance said:

Yep, back in '05. I'm glad we keep focusing on these same stations and not the ones literally falling apart (looking at you 3 Av-138 St).

Heh please. It's the South Bronx... Like the  is going to give a damn...

[Union Tpke]

ESI, now not called as such, will be taken place at 145 St , 167 St , and 174-175 Sts.

Quote

Nearly a Century of Wear, Tear and Deterioration Will Be Fixed, and Stations Modernized, at 145 St, 167 St and 174-175 St

MTA New York City Transit will make structural and functional repairs and improvements at three stations in Harlem and the Bronx beginning in July to improve service reliability and modernize the station environments for nearly 20,000 subway customers on the Concourse  and Lenox  Lines.

The work at 145 St , 167 St , and 174-175 Sts  will repair and modernize these stations following nearly a century of nonstop use with little more than routine maintenance to handle increasingly critical issues such as water mitigation, crumbling concrete ceilings and walls, deteriorating structural steel, daily wear-and-tear and cracked or missing tiles. The 145 St  opened more than a century ago in November 1904, while the other two stations on the Concourse  Line opened in July 1933.

“We’re excited to fix and update these stations because the structural work is critical and customers deserve to experience what a cleaner, safer, modern subway station is like, said MTA New York City Transit President Andy Byford. “We thank our customers for their patience as we work to prepare these stations for decades of continued – and improved – service to the community.”

As crews make critical repairs to the station infrastructure such as concrete and metal platforms, stairs, beams and columns, they will also work to modernize the station with enhancements to all entrances including stairs, LED lighting, digital signage providing real-time service information, and new turnstile areas with security cameras and brighter lighting. Countdown clocks and Help Points, which allow customers to communicate quickly with staff for assistance or emergencies, will be installed throughout the stations. New station furniture and platform safety enhancements such as tactile edge warning strips also will be installed to improve customer safety.

NYC Transit staff have conducted extensive outreach in the affected neighborhoods, meeting with local community boards and contacting elected officials, local businesses and nearby building owners to ensure they are aware of the work and any upcoming service changes related to these repairs.

To rapidly accelerate the project duration, provide unimpeded access to crews and to ensure customer safety during the demolition and construction, the stations will be closed to service for less than 6 months.  The 145 St  station will close beginning July 21. At 167 St , one stair entrance on the southwest corner of Grand Concourse and McClellan Street will close beginning Saturday, July 9, but the entire station will remain open for service until August 27. At 174-175 Sts , one stair entrance on the east side of Grand Concourse above the East 174th Street underpass will close beginning Saturday, July 9, but subway service will not be affected until August 13, when the entire station will close for repairs.

During the station closures, customers can use nearby bus routes for connections to  service. For service to and from 145 St, customers can use the Harlem-148 St  station, or take the M7 or M102 bus to 135 St for  service. Customers can also take the Bx19 bus to the 145 St  station.

For service to and from 167 St , take the Bx1 or Bx2 bus to 170 St  or 161 St-Yankee Stadium .

For service to and from 174-175 Sts , customers can use the Bx1 or Bx2 bus to 170 St  or Tremont Av .

On May 23, NYC Transit President Byford unveiled “Fast Forward: The Plan to Modernize New York City Transit,” which among other initiatives, proposes modernizing the subway’s signal system on a significantly accelerated timeline, redesigning the entire city’s bus network, and improving customer service and communications. The plan also proposes the addition of 180 elevators across the subway network over a period of 10 years. 

The MTA Board approved the $88 million contract for work at all three stations to Citnalta/Forte with Urbahn/HAKS.

 

[Lance]

With these three stations, we'll have a total of 12 stations out of service concurrently due to not-ESI rehabs.

• 163 St-Amsterdam Av  - to reopen in Sept.
• Cathedral Pkwy (110 St  - to reopen in Sept.
• 72 Street  - to reopen in Oct.
• 86 Street  - to reopen in Oct.
• Broadway  - to reopen in Dec.
• 39 Avenue  - to reopen in Dec.
• 57 Street  - closed between 07.09 - December
• 28 Street  - closed between 07.16 - December
• 145 Street  - closed between 07.21 - November
• 23 Street  - closed between 07.23 - December
• 174-175 Streets - closed between 08.13 - ~February 2019
• 167 Street  - closed between 08.27 - ~February 2019

[LGA Link N Train]

38 minutes ago, Lance said:

With these three stations, we'll have a total of 12 stations out of service concurrently due to not-ESI rehabs.

• 163 St-Amsterdam Av  - to reopen in Sept.
• Cathedral Pkwy (110 St  - to reopen in Sept.
• 72 Street  - to reopen in Oct.
• 86 Street  - to reopen in Oct.
• Broadway  - to reopen in Dec.
• 39 Avenue  - to reopen in Dec.
• 57 Street  - closed between 07.09 - December
• 28 Street  - closed between 07.16 - December
• 145 Street  - closed between 07.21 - November
• 23 Street  - closed between 07.23 - December
• 174-175 Streets - closed between 08.13 - ~February 2019
• 167 Street  - closed between 08.27 - ~February 2019

As if any of these are going to meet their deadline. <cough> <cough> . 

Oh, and the part in bold, LMAO   

[Lance]

57 minutes ago, LGA Link N train said:

As if any of these are going to meet their deadline. <cough> <cough> . 

They've been pretty good with keeping to the general schedule on these particular projects, even if that means leaving some of the finishes temporarily incomplete. I've noticed on each of these projects, there has been a last minute dash to get to the finish line in the final weeks of the closures that we don't see at the onset. Quite a shift from the usual snail's pace makes me wonder if time overrun penalties were written into these contracts.