Jump to content
Attention: In order to reply to messages, create topics, have access to other features of the community you must sign up for an account.
Sign in to follow this  
EphraimB

Why is the planned T train going non-stop from Houston St to 14th St

Recommended Posts

I saw a map of the proposed (T) train. I just don't know why it's going to run non-stop from Houston St to 14th St. The (6) train stops at Astor Pl (which is equivalent to 8th St) and the (R)(W) stops at 8th St. Why can't the (T) train stop at 8th St as well?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

...for the same reason the (1) has an 18th st station, but the same (6) train, the same (R)/(W) trains, and the (F) train doesn't?

  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why did they spend $2 billion on the SAS to 96th St and not put in or provision for express tracks so that Harlemites and Bronxites taking (T) don't get screwed by (Q) on their way to Houston St so they can take the M15 to get to 14th St?

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
54 minutes ago, EphraimB said:

I saw a map of the proposed (T) train. I just don't know why it's going to run non-stop from Houston St to 14th St. The (6) train stops at Astor Pl (which is equivalent to 8th St) and the (R)(W) stops at 8th St. Why can't the (T) train stop at 8th St as well?

I remember reading there was a out cry in the 1970's for a stop there. The thing is the SAS is kinda designed to half local half express..so station are spaced at least 10 blocks or better. They've optimized service as best they could with a 2 track setup. They've actually added a few more stops in since some of the original plans. In 1970 the stops were as followed.

  • 126th street
  • 106th street
  • 86th  street
  • 57th street
  • 48-44th streets
  • 34th street
  • 23rd street
  • 14th street
  • Houston Street
  • Grand Street
  • Seaport
  • Whitehall

They had to fight for 96th and 72nd&116th was added in the 1990's IIRC. But this was Bronx feeder back in those days as well I have to factor that in why they might have been skipped.

 

Edited by RailRunRob

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, Deucey said:

Why did they spend $2 billion on the SAS to 96th St and not put in or provision for express tracks so that Harlemites and Bronxites taking (T) don't get screwed by (Q) on their way to Houston St so they can take the M15 to get to 14th St?

Crazy to think the history of the SAS from a 6 track super express to a meager 2 track your welcome! haha

Edited by RailRunRob

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, RailRunRob said:

Crazy to think the history of the SAS from a 6 track super express to a meager 2 track your welcome! haha

Is it though?

I mean, $1.7 billion to build a station in an open pit 1/4 mile from the Hudson River and the damn thing leaks when it rains; $1 billion total to build/rebuild a station feet from the waterfront and they forgot to waterproof it.

Being cheap is kind of how NYC works when it comes to infrastructure.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Deucey said:

Is it though?

I mean, $1.7 billion to build a station in an open pit 1/4 mile from the Hudson River and the damn thing leaks when it rains; $1 billion total to build/rebuild a station feet from the waterfront and they forgot to waterproof it.

Being cheap is kind of how NYC works when it comes to infrastructure.

To today's standards no not crazy at all. The SAS was paid for in full!  And then a Billion mysteriously goes missing from the coffers. The City's future and well being is currently held together with tape and bubblegum. God help us all. 

Edited by RailRunRob

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, RailRunRob said:

To today's standards no not crazy at all. The SAS was paid for in full!  And then a Billion mysteriously goes missing from the coffers. The City's future and well being is currently held together with tape and bubblegum. God help us all. 

Disappeared?

Funny how money always ends up missing, so taxes and tolls always have to go up in this city.

I mean, how is it tolls across a PA bridge are $15 without EZ Pass, but every other Hudson Bridge is less than $7 roundtrip? How is it TBTA bridges - except that one in Far Rockaway - are $9 each way without EZ Pass when every other Hudson Bridge is less than $7 roundtrip? And if TBTA got taken by (MTA) to subsidize NYCTA, with all the cars going over TBTA bridges daily and those bridges having been paid of 3x since opening, how is it (MTA) is still broke?

Matty Moroun owns the Ambassador Bridge in Detroit and ain't broke. Why can't NYC do that?

Because the money is lining the pockets of the people who run and finance the system. That's why we can't have nice things, like a SAS built in the 1930s, or the 1970s, or in the 2010s/2020s that is more than a 3 stop extension of the (Q).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For the same  reason why there's a gap between 72 and 55. Possibly why the 6 and 8 Avenue lines don't have a 28 St station

Edited by Q43LTD

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
36 minutes ago, Deucey said:

Disappeared?

Funny how money always ends up missing, so taxes and tolls always have to go up in this city.

I mean, how is it tolls across a PA bridge are $15 without EZ Pass, but every other Hudson Bridge is less than $7 roundtrip? How is it TBTA bridges - except that one in Far Rockaway - are $9 each way without EZ Pass when every other Hudson Bridge is less than $7 roundtrip? And if TBTA got taken by (MTA) to subsidize NYCTA, with all the cars going over TBTA bridges daily and those bridges having been paid of 3x since opening, how is it (MTA) is still broke?

Matty Moroun owns the Ambassador Bridge in Detroit and ain't broke. Why can't NYC do that?

Because the money is lining the pockets of the people who run and finance the system. That's why we can't have nice things, like a SAS built in the 1930s, or the 1970s, or in the 2010s/2020s that is more than a 3 stop extension of the (Q).

Point well taken! If I had a billion laying around id chip in. There's a lot of wealth in NYC I'm sure if maybe private investors got some interest on their investments or even some tax breaks, Special exceptions for devlopers and their projects they'd do it. They'll make their money back for sure.  As far as Politics without going too far into it. Nobody wants to be held accountable for there actions and track records. Regardless the work still has to get done.

Edited by RailRunRob

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, RailRunRob said:

I remember reading there was a out cry in the 1970's for a stop there. The thing is the SAS is kinda designed to half local half express..so station are spaced at least 10 blocks or better. They've optimized service as best they could with a 2 track setup. They've actually added a few more stops in since some of the original plans. In 1970 the stops were as followed.

  • 126th street
  • 106th street
  • 86th  street
  • 57th street
  • 48-44th streets
  • 34th street
  • 23rd street
  • 14th street
  • Houston Street
  • Grand Street
  • Seaport
  • Whitehall

They had to fight for 96th and 72nd&116th was added in the 1990's IIRC. But this was Bronx feeder back in those days as well I have to factor that in why they might have been skipped.

 

Forgot two majors.

  • Chatham
  •  Pine Wall streets

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Because adding stops between would be a waste of time and money for relatively little additional coverage. We’re building a subway line, not an underground bus service. Keep in mind that they’ll probably design the stations to extend north from Houston/south from 14th, closing the gap. 

And FWIW, there’s a pinned topic on the SAS for a reason... 

  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Lawrence St said:

Don't the tunnels north of 96th St have a middle express trackway already built?

no. 
There is a third trackway around 116th street intended for layups. Otherwise, it is 2 tracks. 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Lawrence St said:

Don't the tunnels north of 96th St have a middle express trackway already built?

Not for express service but for storage and maintenance.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Deucey said:

Why did they spend $2 billion on the SAS to 96th St and not put in or provision for express tracks so that Harlemites and Bronxites taking (T) don't get screwed by (Q) on their way to Houston St so they can take the M15 to get to 14th St?

There is (kind of) a backdoors provision for an extra two tracks using storage tracks that are planned from 21st to 9th Sts. If you wanted an express track, that would probably be the place to start.

The thing is, we built the tunnels with TBMs, so unlike with cut-and-cover you have to do a lot more work to double the amount of tunnels. And building them right now wouldn't make sense because they wouldn't go anywhere or be much of an express. It took 25 years for the Sixth Avenue Line to get its express tracks.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In my opinion, there really is no such thing as "6th Avenue Express" since the only local stations are 14th St and 23rd St...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, bobtehpanda said:

The thing is, we built the tunnels with TBMs, so unlike with cut-and-cover you have to do a lot more work to double the amount of tunnels. And building them right now wouldn't make sense because they wouldn't go anywhere or be much of an express. It took 25 years for the Sixth Avenue Line to get its express tracks.

If SAS were like LA's Blue Line, Minneapolis' system or any other "new" system that has growth exceeding projections and now needed to build extra trackage, I could understand..

But SAS is replacing a busy El shut down 65 years ago, and is to relieve the rail line busier than THREE big city transit systems total ridership combined. Yet instead of provisioning for the future where SAS will be extremely busy and slow, they cheaped out.

Jeremy Clarkson calls it the "'At'll do" attitude - doing enough to do something, but not enough to do quality.

Quality would be provision to have Express trackage - even if a three-track - for the day when SAS gets to 125th St and grabs (4)(5) riders and/or the Bronx and carries local riders cross-borough.

What they did instead was relieve the not-overcrowded (til now) (6) and force SAS - when it gets to the Bronx to be another (2) train - slow AF and useful only to folks in Manhattan going 3 stops.

BOT built the entire IND with provisions and junctions to expand as needs grow - it's the wars and politicians succeeding it that screwed that up. And (MTA). Now, we're building stuff without planning for the day when we need more. All because "it'll cost more if we move gas and power lines."

Yet they want more of my money in 2019. Nah, we shouldn't be paying for mismanagement and decisions that'll create the next crisis. Thank God I'll have my car by then.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, Deucey said:

If SAS were like LA's Blue Line, Minneapolis' system or any other "new" system that has growth exceeding projections and now needed to build extra trackage, I could understand..

But SAS is replacing a busy El shut down 65 years ago, and is to relieve the rail line busier than THREE big city transit systems total ridership combined. Yet instead of provisioning for the future where SAS will be extremely busy and slow, they cheaped out.

Jeremy Clarkson calls it the "'At'll do" attitude - doing enough to do something, but not enough to do quality.

Quality would be provision to have Express trackage - even if a three-track - for the day when SAS gets to 125th St and grabs (4)(5) riders and/or the Bronx and carries local riders cross-borough.

What they did instead was relieve the not-overcrowded (til now) (6) and force SAS - when it gets to the Bronx to be another (2) train - slow AF and useful only to folks in Manhattan going 3 stops.

BOT built the entire IND with provisions and junctions to expand as needs grow - it's the wars and politicians succeeding it that screwed that up. And (MTA). Now, we're building stuff without planning for the day when we need more. All because "it'll cost more if we move gas and power lines."

Yet they want more of my money in 2019. Nah, we shouldn't be paying for mismanagement and decisions that'll create the next crisis. Thank God I'll have my car by then.

Depends on your viewpoint. "Express" is all relative; the 8th Av "Express" skips a total of two stops, the 6th Av "Express" skips a total of three.

I could see a future in which an additional pair of SAS tracks are built, but only from the vicinity of 9th St to the vicinity of 63rd, because 2nd Av does not have an equivalent to the 6th Av express tracks to use as a local track. It'd basically be a proto-8th Av setup (not much faster express tracks to Harlem, local tracks peeling off to Queens and just before Downtown).

What you really want is separated Q tracks, and I agree; there should have been, at the very least, provisions for a lower level of 72nd. A two-level 72nd would probably have been cheaper than a three-track one (it would take up less space, for one), and it would also finally give the Broadway Express a terminal that it could use by itself.

Edited by bobtehpanda

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, bobtehpanda said:

Depends on your viewpoint. "Express" is all relative; the 8th Av "Express" skips a total of two stops, the 6th Av "Express" skips a total of three.

You must have meant that the 8 Avenue express skips 3 stops: 50 Street, 23 Street, and Spring Street.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, bobtehpanda said:

Depends on your viewpoint. "Express" is all relative; the 8th Av "Express" skips a total of two stops, the 6th Av "Express" skips a total of three.

I could see a future in which an additional pair of SAS tracks are built, but only from the vicinity of 9th St to the vicinity of 63rd, because 2nd Av does not have an equivalent to the 6th Av express tracks to use as a local track. It'd basically be a proto-8th Av setup (not much faster express tracks to Harlem, local tracks peeling off to Queens and just before Downtown).

What you really want is separated Q tracks, and I agree; there should have been, at the very least, provisions for a lower level of 72nd. A two-level 72nd would probably have been cheaper than a three-track one (it would take up less space, for one), and it would also finally give the Broadway Express a terminal that it could use by itself.

6th Av Express is a misnomer b/c it stops every 8-10 blocks above 34th St; it's like a Limited Stop line. 8th Av - depends on what you refer to as 8th Av - CPW, St Nick et al.

But you are right, SAS should've allowed for a separate trackage for Broadway and 6th Av line trains. But even still, if SAS is going to end up in the Bx, given how long the commute for folks above Tremont Av is on the Subway - since if they're not on Concourse, they're on IRT els that stop every-DAMN-where, an actual express line is what should've been built for SAS.

We could look at it like how many of us who built systems on BAHN would do - Express/Local Setups with branches going everywhere - like the anticipated Queens branch. But in the end, (MTA) cocked this one up by planning for relief and not planning for growth. (Unless they're planning on building a line along First Av when the time comes...)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, Q43LTD said:

For the same  reason why there's a gap between 72 and 55. Possibly why the 6 and 8 Avenue lines don't have a 28 St station

To be fair though having a 28th Street station on 8th Avenue would've been pointless considering the north end of the exit at the 23rd Street Station is north of 25th Street.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 hours ago, EphraimB said:

I saw a map of the proposed (T) train. I just don't know why it's going to run non-stop from Houston St to 14th St. The (6) train stops at Astor Pl (which is equivalent to 8th St) and the (R)(W) stops at 8th St. Why can't the (T) train stop at 8th St as well?

 

Where will the auxiliary entrances be? If the 14th Street station has an entrance at 12th Street and the Houston Street station has an entrance at 2nd Street, then those two entrances would be only 10 blocks apart and an intermediate station wouldn't be needed.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Daniel The Cool said:

To be fair though having a 28th Street station on 8th Avenue would've been pointless considering the north end of the exit at the 23rd Street Station is north of 25th Street.

Same for 18 Street. The 14 Street station has its south end barely even touching 14 Street. The northern end is just half a block shy of 17 Street.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hence one of the reasons why 18th St was closed.

Anyway, as I said, there is really no such thing as 8th & 6th Aveue express because they don't skip that many stops as compared to 7th Avenue and Broadway, hence why I call them the 6th & 8th Avenue Limiteds.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.