Expanding Second Avenue subway beyond planned terminus key to system’s future, RPA says

[bobtehpanda]

11 hours ago, MassTransitHonchkrow said:

I do. However, it's the continued lack of out of box thinking that will send this system to ruin.

I'm also aware the platforms cannot accommodate the width of R160 and similar cars used on lettered lines. The system's trifecta nature is a liability that will make modernization difficult and costly.

I believe such service once existed, but it was torn down. New Yorkers' disdain for the political process will continue to make them vulnerable to the power grabs that essentially allowed Moses to run wild.

If they choose to say nothing they get nothing.

First of all, the system has two divisions. Plenty of jurisdictions have two or more operational divisions (London, Berlin, Paris) and their transit networks don't really suffer for it. Second of all, throwing a bunch of spaghetti at the wall and waiting to see what sticks is not a real solution to real world problems. And third of all, as a New Yorker, you are actually part of the problem. Acting all holier than thou behind a computer screen is not really a substitute for work, time, or money.

[LTA1992]

I will always be vehement in my opposition if a 125th Street Crosstown subway when The Bronx has three distinct areas that need subways. 

The Bronx needs two new subway lines, not one. And for 6 Billion, phase 2 might as well go straight to 3rd and 149th. 

[Deucey]

24 minutes ago, LTA1992 said:

I will always be vehement in my opposition if a 125th Street Crosstown subway when The Bronx has three distinct areas that need subways. 

The Bronx needs two new subway lines, not one. And for 6 Billion, phase 2 might as well go straight to 3rd and 149th. 

It's not like a 125th St Crosstown can't hook north into the Bronx and serve as a southern crosstown line...

[bobtehpanda]

1 hour ago, LTA1992 said:

I will always be vehement in my opposition if a 125th Street Crosstown subway when The Bronx has three distinct areas that need subways. 

The Bronx needs two new subway lines, not one. And for 6 Billion, phase 2 might as well go straight to 3rd and 149th. 

You say "need", but I haven't seen any sort of numbers indicating anything other than the Third Av corridor really needs additional subway service.

[LTA1992]

3 hours ago, bobtehpanda said:

You say "need", but I haven't seen any sort of numbers indicating anything other than the Third Av corridor really needs additional subway service.

Yes, need. For a few reasons. Aside from the Third Avenue Line, a line via Lafayette Avenue is also needed. How else are you going to maximize on relieving the LEX if you don't tackle where many of the passengers are coming from?

Secondly, new subways to areas without can begin to solve that housing deficit we have in our city. 

You say there may not be a need there, but plans for Second Avenue, even down to its most bare bones version, included an extension to the southeast Bronx. Not to mention the economic opportunities for the residents of this city's poorest borough.

You aren't solving anything is you end the line at Lex and 125th as why would anyone transfer now that they are on the express portion of their route? 

The Bronx needs more subways and I've said that time and time again. For years. And now that I live there, I will advocate that even more. I've also explained time and time again in much more detail in the past. Anyone with a brain can see that this city will benefit far more from The Bronx getting two subways instead of giving it one, and sending the other via 125th Street through an area marvelously served by transit. Subway or no subway, 125th Street would be crowded. It's a major commercial thoroughfare that sits at a point where many bus routes shift avenues due to the shape of the island. Not to mention that it connects to the FDR as well as the Willis and Third Avenue bridges. 

There are more areas in need of service. 

[CenSin]

4 hours ago, Deucey said:

It's not like a 125th St Crosstown can't hook north into the Bronx and serve as a southern crosstown line...

That idea is suspiciously like the one that Wallyhorse had been spamming.

3 hours ago, bobtehpanda said:

You say "need", but I haven't seen any sort of numbers indicating anything other than the Third Av corridor really needs additional subway service.

The studies have probably been done since there have been previous calls for such an extension. The RPA themselves might have even called for it in a previous report.

[Deucey]

1 hour ago, CenSin said:

That idea is suspiciously like the one that Wallyhorse had been spamming.

While Wallyhorse goes to extremes in his visions, having been forced to endure intraborough travel regularly in the Bronx, SI and Brooklyn, I see a need for a better system than buses. And in the RBB thread, I did post some ideas I had about how that could be done.

Sometime within the last two months, I attempted to get to Bk Museum from Fresh Pond Road in Ridgewood via bus. Two hours of buses and a 10 minute walk because by train:  to the  to the  to Nevins to the  to Bk Museum. 

Even though the system is Manhattan centric, why must it continue to be?

(And yes, I could've switched to the  at Lorimer and B44'd it to Nostrand Station, but it would've taken just as much time.)

One day after showing an apartment on Concourse/170th, I took Bx1 to Fordham to visit a cousin at Fordham/University. Why'd it take an hour to go those two miles? Or, when I lived with said cousin, why was it 30 minutes on Bx12 to get to White Plains to get on the  to visit another at Wakefield?

Or that time here on SI when I tried getting to JFK without using the Ferry to see if living next to the Bridge was worth the savings in rent, and I still had to ride the  to MetroTech because the bus trip is two hours and two fares from 86th St.

Is crosstown train travel a must-have? No, but it's more urgent than "Nice-to-have." And doing it right relieves some congestion in Manhattan and could result in more office-commercial development elsewhere in the city - relieving congestion in Manhattan further. At least until the phenomenon of induced demand kicks in...

[bobtehpanda]

2 hours ago, LTA1992 said:

Yes, need. For a few reasons. Aside from the Third Avenue Line, a line via Lafayette Avenue is also needed. How else are you going to maximize on relieving the LEX if you don't tackle where many of the passengers are coming from?

<opinion />

 

1 hour ago, CenSin said:

That idea is suspiciously like the one that Wallyhorse had been spamming.

The studies have probably been done since there have been previous calls for such an extension. The RPA themselves might have even called for it in a previous report.

If the studies have been done, I'd like to see some data. O&D demand data from the Census exists, we have data on bus ridership, subway congestion, and other things, yet I have yet to see some actual hard data instead of passionated opinion that shows huge latent demand for an East Bronx line. 125 St, on the other hand, has already had this kind of study done for the M60 SBS, and extending the subway network there would allow some rationalization of the bus network in Manhattan.

35 minutes ago, Deucey said:

While Wallyhorse goes to extremes in his visions, having been forced to endure intraborough travel regularly in the Bronx, SI and Brooklyn, I see a need for a better system than buses. And in the RBB thread, I did post some ideas I had about how that could be done.

Is crosstown train travel a must-have? No, but it's more urgent than "Nice-to-have." And doing it right relieves some congestion in Manhattan and could result in more office-commercial development elsewhere in the city - relieving congestion in Manhattan further. At least until the phenomenon of induced demand kicks in...

Personally, I think that we need a better system than buses in the street. However, I don't take that to mean that there should be no buses at all. After all, in my current city they built a tunnel that was capable of holding buses, and that could hold light rail at a later date. They just grade-separated the most traffic-prone parts of bus routes and left the rest with priority bus lanes at street level, and for the most part it's worked with the limited financial resources on hand. Something similar could work for parts of the Bronx.

Quite frankly, you could encourage outer borough office development today, there's just no political will to get it done. If you had office hubs set up at 149-GC or Fordham Plaza with easy access to commuter rail, they could essentially function like Exchange Square does in Jersey City today; maybe not head offices, but still lots of firms setting up shop, and commuters stopping short of Manhattan and saving commute time. Same goes for ENY, Jackson Heights, Jamaica, and Flushing.

[Deucey]

49 minutes ago, D to 96 St said:

I actually agree with a Lafayette Av line off of 2 Av... cuz Throgs Neck is miles from the . An ya also have a point with low-income neighborhoods. 

However, I still think a 125 St crosstown is beneficial as riders can take BOTH the subway and bus! 

And this is a proposal that is a bit odd and will only see the light of day if SAS is expanded to 4 tracks. (The tracks from 63 St to 125 St would have to be in a lower tunnel.)

NE Corridor/Co-op-City Branch- Branches off of SAS and better serves as an alternative to the . Also serves Jacobi Medical Ctr and Parkchester. 

 

I understand your thinking. I once had to backtrack to 34 St-Herald Square to get from the west side to the east side instead of taking the M72.

But personally, I'd have these as crosstown subway extensions.

125 St Crosstown- Solves commuting around Central Park and reduces the need to take crosstown buses.

86 St-Northern Blvd Trunk Line- An extension of the  up 10 Av and then the former. This will also reduce the need of taking crosstown buses. 

Phase 1: Extend the  to 72 St, with tail tracks going as far as 86 St. Provisions will be used later for an extension across 86 St.

Phase 2: Extend the line from its terminus at 72 St to Northern Blvd in Queens via 86 St and Broadway. The  will then act as a crosstown line just like on 14 St. 

Phase 3: Extend the line across Northern Blvd to Flushing. Tail tracks will go as far as Union St, with provisions to extend the line further east.

Phase 4: Bring the  to a new terminus at College Point-127 St. This will utilize the old IND Second System plan, and will be beneficial to Whitestone and the former. 

Phase 5: Add a Brooklyn-Crosstown Line train (U) to connect with the  at Northern and run out to Flushing. 

Co-op-City Concourse Extension-Serves the aforementioned neighborhood and acts as a crosstown line. 

 

 

 

125th St crosstown as a 4-track b/t Broadway and Lex; separated into three branches:

Main branch follows Astoria Bl to LGA then to JFK - Whether via RBB or via alt routing with 4 tracks

2nd branch is  to Coney Island

3rd branch is  to Bx -  Soundview via 167/170th or the equivalent

Then the Fordham line b/t 207th and City Island connecting to  /mirroring Bx12 

We can speculate and dream, but I'm wondering why this hasn't been serious conversation in this city since the fiscal crisis finished.

Even if it's LRT aerial or subway, it's still something that should be done - not like BQX as a novelty for W'burg hipsters and bankers, but as a serious transport thing designed to serve people transit starved in each borough.

[LGA Link N Train]

Huh .... I see that I'm late for the show....

Well, here are my opinions on RPA's expansion plans for the subway 

1. SAS 125 extension. I don't think that such an extension is as effective as opposed to sending it to even Dyre Avenue. Which some people are opposed to.

2. Utica Extension, I LOVE IT. but it should not be the going down this route , I'd choose the for this

3. The Jewel Avenue extension is ..... eh, but it ignored the problem that the and go through which is the same bottleneck that the go through at Fulton. I'd leave the proposal as is, but ........ something doesn't feel right about this proposal 

4. Northern Blvd (undoubtedly) needs a subway and shouldn't interfere with QBL. However, I oppose to having it labeled though, besides that I support it

5. The extension to 14 St-9 Av, eehhhhh, I don't see how it would work but I do see its potential.

6. The Astoria extension, can I say that while I see a purpose for it, just WHAT THE F**K RPA, WHAT KINDA BS IS THIS, they wanna extend it AWAY from LGA...........     why?

7. FIRST OFF, EXTENDING THE  TO GRAND CONCOURSE IS THE LEAST EFFECTIVE WAY TO EXPAND, REVIVE THE DYRE AVENUE EXTENSION FOR ALL I CARE, just, why something as stupid as this

 

DISMISSED 

[Deucey]

1 hour ago, bobtehpanda said:

 

If the studies have been done, I'd like to see some data. O&D demand data from the Census exists, we have data on bus ridership, subway congestion, and other things, yet I have yet to see some actual hard data instead of passionated opinion that shows huge latent demand for an East Bronx line. 125 St, on the other hand, has already had this kind of study done for the M60 SBS, and extending the subway network there would allow some rationalization of the bus network in Manhattan.

Personally, I think that we need a better system than buses in the street. However, I don't take that to mean that there should be no buses at all. After all, in my current city they built a tunnel that was capable of holding buses, and that could hold light rail at a later date. They just grade-separated the most traffic-prone parts of bus routes and left the rest with priority bus lanes at street level, and for the most part it's worked with the limited financial resources on hand. Something similar could work for parts of the Bronx.

Quite frankly, you could encourage outer borough office development today, there's just no political will to get it done. If you had office hubs set up at 149-GC or Fordham Plaza with easy access to commuter rail, they could essentially function like Exchange Square does in Jersey City today; maybe not head offices, but still lots of firms setting up shop, and commuters stopping short of Manhattan and saving commute time. Same goes for ENY, Jackson Heights, Jamaica, and Flushing.

The bus, like the poor, will be with us always, if I can bastardize the red letters we all memorized Sundays in pews.

But no one in power or position is thinking of how to make a crowded city dependent on collective transport move efficiently. I honestly believe these two things:

1) Mikey Bloomberg was a shit mayor when it came to transit; and

2) Folks running the  feel entitled to their jobs and disinclined to do more than token gestures to serve the public;

because the mindset is like Tammany Hall or Whitehall UK - give proletariat folks bread and a circus and they'll shut up and never vote them out because who thinks about life being difficult when they get a free meal and show? 

All that money spent going to Hudson Yards for buildings not erected could've gone towards lines or extensions that would've helped the folks who actually write the tax checks that fund this city instead of developers who manipulate money to pay minimal taxes and keep us from having nice and useful things.

[Porter]

I've recently developed an opinion that will likely prove to be highly unpopular in this community: phases 3&4 should be shelved and phase 2 should be replaced with a plan to run the straight up into the Bronx, connecting with the at Third Avenue–138th Street and the at Third Avenue–149th Street. End of story. After that extension, we should allocate the majority of funds towards improving the existing system. Sometime in the distant future, after we've built up a nest-egg for transit adventurism, we can talk about a 125th Street crosstown line, a new line down to the Seaport (and perhaps even into Brooklyn), and a turquoise line into Queens via 63rd Street. All of those ideas are great, but considering the financial situation and who needs service the most, I think my plan makes the most sense.

[bobtehpanda]

19 minutes ago, Skipper said:

I've recently developed an opinion that will likely prove to be highly unpopular in this community: phases 3&4 should be shelved and phase 2 should be replaced with a plan to run the straight up into the Bronx, connecting with the at Third Avenue–138th Street and the at Third Avenue–149th Street. End of story. After that extension, we should allocate the majority of funds towards improving the existing system. Sometime in the distant future, after we've built up a nest-egg for transit adventurism, we can talk about a 125th Street crosstown line, a new line down to the Seaport (and perhaps even into Brooklyn), and a turquoise line into Queens via 63rd Street. All of those ideas are great, but considering the financial situation and who needs service the most, I think my plan makes the most sense.

The problem with that is that we are building East Side Access and we are not about to stop. When ESA opens, the lower half of the Lex will see the same crowding pressure as the upper half sees today. Even today the extent of the worst crush conditions goes as far south as Grand Central.

[bobtehpanda]

1 hour ago, Deucey said:

The bus, like the poor, will be with us always, if I can bastardize the red letters we all memorized Sundays in pews.

But no one in power or position is thinking of how to make a crowded city dependent on collective transport move efficiently. I honestly believe these two things:

1) Mikey Bloomberg was a shit mayor when it came to transit; and

2) Folks running the  feel entitled to their jobs and disinclined to do more than token gestures to serve the public;

because the mindset is like Tammany Hall or Whitehall UK - give proletariat folks bread and a circus and they'll shut up and never vote them out because who thinks about life being difficult when they get a free meal and show? 

All that money spent going to Hudson Yards for buildings not erected could've gone towards lines or extensions that would've helped the folks who actually write the tax checks that fund this city instead of developers who manipulate money to pay minimal taxes and keep us from having nice and useful things.

Agreed. Mike redirected the scheduled growth from areas that could handle it next to subways, and put it on the waterfront, probably the place least equipped to deal with any reasonable expansion of residential capacity.

The real problem is that we are reaching the limits of the zoning code of 1961. It's high time to do an update, and the Bloomberg years would've been the prime time to start the discussion, but we squandered it to gentrify the waterfront and make a moonshot for the Olympics.

[Porter]

4 minutes ago, bobtehpanda said:

The problem with that is that we are building East Side Access and we are not about to stop. When ESA opens, the lower half of the Lex will see the same crowding pressure as the upper half sees today. Even today the extent of the worst crush conditions goes as far south as Grand Central.

When will ESA actually open?

[bobtehpanda]

1 minute ago, Skipper said:

When will ESA actually open?

Right now the prediction is 2023. Either way, probably before we even finish Phase II, given that Phase I took 7 years to complete.

[Porter]

1 minute ago, bobtehpanda said:

Right now the prediction is 2023. Either way, probably before we even finish Phase II, given that Phase I took 7 years to complete.

The could make it to The Hub by 2023 if the had the will. Phase 1 was comparatively more difficult.

[bobtehpanda]

Just now, Skipper said:

The could make it to The Hub by 2023 if the had the will. Phase 1 was comparatively more difficult.

The point is, the downtown segments of the Lex will be congested relatively soon, and we will need to build out at least Phase III (and probably Phase IV, since most of the commuters riding ESA are going to want to be at Seaport, Fulton St, and Hanover Sq)

[Porter]

23 minutes ago, bobtehpanda said:

The point is, the downtown segments of the Lex will be congested relatively soon, and we will need to build out at least Phase III (and probably Phase IV, since most of the commuters riding ESA are going to want to be at Seaport, Fulton St, and Hanover Sq)

To which other lines will ESA connect?

[bobtehpanda]

3 hours ago, Skipper said:

To which other lines will ESA connect?

ESA has a single stop at Grand Central. That being said, no one would take the , since right now if you wanted the for Hudson Yards, it would make more sense to get out at Penn. The Shuttle might also fill up, but really that is no different from the situation today and there is no realistic solution to solving Shuttle crowding.

[Porter]

That makes more sense if you want to allow the to shoulder the Long Island burden and divert local commuters to the lines as they're introduced. Making the more useful by extending it could also help alleviate the Lexington Line, though.

[bobtehpanda]

23 minutes ago, Skipper said:

That makes more sense if you want to allow the to shoulder the Long Island burden and divert local commuters to the lines as they're introduced. Making the more useful by extending it could also help alleviate the Lexington Line, though.

Eh, not really. You'd need something as direct as the Lex heading downtown. No one wants to take the scenic route around the FWS to go to NYSE.

[B35 via Church]

Quote

 

Manhattan

Second Avenue subway: Extend the Second Avenue line from 96th Street past its next planned terminus of 125th Street and Second Avenue, to Park Avenue and then westward along 125th Street to Broadway. The idea is that in the three miles of expansion, the subway would hit underserved sections of Harlem while connecting to seven subway lines at four stations.

If SAS is to be extended to serve anything in an easterly to westerly fashion, it should be in the Bronx IMO.... I'm inclined to believe that more people that travel along 125th are coming from (meaning, residents of) Upper Manhattan & the Bronx, than those coming from areas too far south of 125th st....

Or an alternate idea for cross-125th st travel (which would have nothing to do w/ SAS), I'd like to see a "cross bronx" subway that would start descending southward at some point in the Bronx, to eventually run westward along 125th.... I'm not claiming any of this would be feasible, but I would favor that over extending SAS westward along 125th or extending the eastward from 207th....

Regardless, I don't see an SAS extension past 125th/Lex being THAT vital to the subway's future... The MTA has a hell of a lot more to worry about than a subway extension (which isn't exactly lightweight, but still)....

Queens

Northern Boulevard line: Create a new 3.7-mile subway line running from 36th Street and Northern Boulevard to Willets Point, where it could either continue east to serve north Flushing and Mitchell-Linden or turn north to pass under Flushing Bay to College Point.

Jewel Avenue line: Build a 5.7-mile Jewel Avenue line that would branch off the Queens Boulevard line to the transit deserts of Pomonok and Fresh Meadows in central Queens.

Astoria line extension: Add a 0.8-mile extension to hook service closer to the East River at 21st Street and 20th Avenue. A new yard would be constructed on the northern side of Ditmars Boulevard along 20th Street.

If we're talking rail transit, IMO, LRT would be better suited for that stretch being proposed; I'd try to find a way to connect it to a ferry station on top of it .... A spur from off the QB line that would serve Jewel av IMO wouldn't be worth it in the longrun; NE Queens & SE Queens are more deserving of a direct subway line, I'm sorry..... As for that Astoria extension, whoever proposed that either lives in that area, or has family &/or friends that live in that pocket of Astoria.... So selfish, it's disgusting.

The Bronx

Second Avenue extension: In addition to an expansion out west, the plan association calls for a northern expansion to the Grand Concourse at 149th Street to connect to the 2, 4 and 5 trains.

Not that I side with this, but let's run with this for a second.... If the Q & the T are to run to 125th/Lex at minimum & these proposers also want SAS to connect to the @ 125th, then which line would run along 125th & which line would run up to 149th/GC? Or do we just do eenie, meenie miney mo as a determinant....

 

response in BLACK....

 

On 12/1/2017 at 3:38 PM, MassTransitHonchkrow said:

I do. However, it's the continued lack of out of box thinking that will send this system to ruin.

I'm also aware the platforms cannot accommodate the width of R160 and similar cars used on lettered lines. The system's trifecta nature is a liability that will make modernization difficult and costly.

I believe such service once existed, but it was torn down. New Yorkers' disdain for the political process will continue to make them vulnerable to the power grabs that essentially allowed Moses to run wild.

If they choose to say nothing they get nothing.

Still waiting for "the political process" to give we, the general public, results that garner the least amount of skepticism..... Politics is dirty & it always will be.

[MassTransitHonchkrow]

On 12/2/2017 at 2:49 AM, bobtehpanda said:

First of all, the system has two divisions. Plenty of jurisdictions have two or more operational divisions (London, Berlin, Paris) and their transit networks don't really suffer for it. Second of all, throwing a bunch of spaghetti at the wall and waiting to see what sticks is not a real solution to real world problems. And third of all, as a New Yorker, you are actually part of the problem. Acting all holier than thou behind a computer screen is not really a substitute for work, time, or money.

Not the divisions I was talking about. Three, as I said. The IND, BMT and IRT portions of the subway system cannot interact directly with each other and their individual shortcomings drag the system down.

Public transit is in bed with politics, and it's impractical to compare our transit system with others when they don't have the same types of issues.

Stop making this about me. I attend board meetings in both Bowling Green and The Westchester County Center. Unlike you, my PFP is not a symbol. It is me, and the same one I use on all forums. Who's really hiding behind a screen. Don't make me laugh.

Throwing a bunch of disconnected points and misfired statements doesn't solve real world problems. Shame on the three imbeciles who gave you reputation for misfired banter.

[MassTransitHonchkrow]

8 hours ago, B35 via Church said:

response in BLACK....

 

Still waiting for "the political process" to give we, the general public, results that garner the least amount of skepticism..... Politics is dirty & it always will be.

Transit needs to be disconnected from politics if it is ever to make the comeback New Yorkers currently invest three figures in.