Public transit systems: New York City Subway (Second Avenue Subway Extension) vs. Paris Métro (Grand Paris Express)

Quick Verdict

The Grand Paris Express is a more ambitious and comprehensive project with a focus on automation and sustainability, while the Second Avenue Subway Extension, despite being smaller, faces significantly higher costs per mile.

The Grand Paris Express is a much larger project in scope than the Second Avenue Subway Extension, with significantly more new stations and longer lines.
The Second Avenue Subway Extension is notably more expensive per mile/kilometer than the Grand Paris Express.
The Grand Paris Express aims for full automation and driverless operation, while the Second Avenue Subway Extension uses conventional rolling stock.
Both projects focus on improving accessibility and integrating with existing transit networks.
Both projects aim to have a positive economic impact on their surrounding areas.

Key features – Side-by-Side

Attribute	New York City Subway (Second Avenue Subway Extension)	Paris Métro (Grand Paris Express)
Name	New York City Subway (Second Avenue Subway Extension)	Paris Métro (Grand Paris Express)
Projected Ridership (Daily)	Full line: 560,000; Phases 1 & 2: 300,000; Phase 2: 111,500 (2017), 123,000 (2035)	2,000,000
Projected Ridership (Annual)	Phase 2: 32,951,600 (2017), 36,340,100 (2035)	Not available
Total Project Cost	Full line: Over $17 billion; Phase 1: $4.45 billion; Phase 2: $7.699 billion	€35.6 billion / AUD 56.5 billion
Cost per Mile/Kilometer	Phase 1: $2.225 billion/mile ($1.38 billion/km); Phase 2: $4.374 billion/mile ($2.72 billion/km)	Approximately €140 million per kilometer
Number of New Stations	Full line: 16; Phase 1: 3; Phase 2: 3	68
Length of New Lines	Full line: 8.5 miles (13.7 km); Phase 1: 2 miles (3.2 km); Phase 2: 1.76 miles (2.83 km)	200 kilometers (120 miles)
Construction Timeline	Phase 1: 2007 - January 2017; Phase 2: January 2024 - Projected September 2032	2015 - 2030
Rolling Stock	R11 'million dollar train' (prototype)	Alstom Metropolis trains (fully automated and driverless)
Frequency of Service (Peak)	Phase 2: Every 3 minutes (weekday peak)	90-second headways
Frequency of Service (Off-Peak)	Phase 2: Every 5 minutes (weekday off-peak), every 6 minutes (weekends), 24/7 service	2–3 minute headway
Accessibility Features	Phase 2: 3 new ADA-accessible stations	Stations accessible for all passengers, dedicated areas for passengers with reduced mobility
Integration with Existing Network	Phase 1: Connects to BMT Broadway Line via 63rd Street Line; Phase 2: Connects to Lexington Avenue Line (4/5/6 trains) and Metro-North Railroad at 125th Street	Extensions of existing lines, connections to existing RER lines, tramways, and bus routes
Environmental Impact Assessment	FEIS approved April 2004; Supplemental Environmental Assessment for Phase 2 released July 2018; FTA issued 'Finding of No Significant Impact' for Phase 2	Aims to reduce CO2 emissions, using low-carbon materials, transporting excavated earth by river and rail, implementing energy-efficient designs
Projected Economic Impact	Boost economic development in East Harlem, attract businesses, create job opportunities, increase property values	Boost to Île-de-France region's GDP, job creation, economic growth in served areas, increased property values near new stations

Overall Comparison

Grand Paris Express: 120 miles, 68 stations, €35.6B cost. Second Avenue Subway: 8.5 miles, 16 stations, $17B+ cost.

Pros and Cons

New York City Subway (Second Avenue Subway Extension)

Pros:

Reduced crowding on the Lexington Avenue Line and local bus service
Shorter commute times (potential savings of up to 20 minutes)
Improved transit access to East Side neighborhoods
Increased connectivity with other subway and commuter rail lines
One-seat ride from East Harlem to the Upper East Side, West Midtown, and Coney Island
Expected to increase property values in Yorkville and Lenox Hill
Expected to stimulate real estate development
Expected to reduce carbon pollution by reducing congestion on other subway lines
Improved access to jobs, health care, and other services for low-income residents

Cons:

High cost
Construction was disruptive to residents and businesses
Faced numerous delays due to funding issues, the Great Depression, and World War II

Paris Métro (Grand Paris Express)

Pros:

Streamlined commutes
Reduced travel times
Better connections between suburbs
Access to jobs and services
Improved quality of life
Stimulates economic growth
New business districts
Fully automated lines
Powered by renewable energy
Sustainable and green designs for stations
Encourages walking and cycling

Cons:

Scale of the project
Tunneling deep underground
Ensuring safety during construction
Potential for delays
Potential for cost overruns

User Experiences and Feedback

New York City Subway (Second Avenue Subway Extension)

What Users Love

Alleviates congestion on the Lexington Avenue Line
Phase 1 has reduced crowding on the 4/5/6 lines by an average of 40%
Provides increased multimodal transit connectivity at the 125th Street station
Serves an area with a large concentration of affordable housing
New stations will be ADA-accessible

Common Complaints

One of the most expensive subway projects in the world
Critics have lambasted the high cost of the project

Value Perception

No value feedback reported.

Paris Métro (Grand Paris Express)

What Users Love

Improved connections with existing transport system
Brings new activities and job opportunities to disadvantaged areas
Advanced safety systems
Video surveillance
Centralized command posts
Electric service braking
Automated driverless operations

Common Complaints

No major complaints reported.

Value Perception

Expected to accommodate an additional 2 million users
Paris project is being completed for about half the price of similar projects in the United States
42 stations are located within 800 meters of city-designated disadvantaged areas