An up-close look at the 2nd Ave Subway

[INDman]

So true, it's such a hackjob.

 

Its what happens when you tunnel through a swamp and you dont water proof the damn thing. I wonder how long before it needs a major rebuilding to keep fropm flodding or collapsing. As for the SAS, untill I'm ridding arain under 2nd Av, I doubt the whole project.

[Grand Concourse]

I really think at least building 72nd St would be something. At least then they can have a direct Broadway-6th Av transfer at 63rd-Lex and no longer need to terminate trains at 57-7th. [Yes I know the will be gone, but I still really doubt Astoria can handle all and trains terminating there.]

[rockdove]

Anybody know how to save this video? I'm only getting half of the video from the file in my cache folder.

[Princelex]

This was really fascinating and it makes me even more excited about the possibility of finally having a subway under 2nd Ave. It's WAY, WAY overdue. Thanks to the OP for sharing that video.

[R110B]

Wirelessly posted via (Mozilla/5.0 (Danger hiptop 4.6; U; rv:1.7.12) Gecko/20050920)

 

Agreed about the progress, but what about the Archer Avenue and 63rd Street lines that opened in 1988 and 1989?

I meant like a full new line.not expansion stations

The archer line just wasn't as good as the original jamaica line to 168st from 121st.

[Ms. W Supporter]

Question: Is any of this route going to be elevated or outside?

 

I love outdoor routes, so it would be awesome if the line was outside after 96th Street or something!

[R110B]

Wirelessly posted via (Mozilla/5.0 (Danger hiptop 4.6; U; rv:1.7.12) Gecko/20050920)

 

Question: Is any of this route going to be elevated or outside?

 

I love outdoor routes, so it would be awesome if the line was outside after 96th Street or something!

No the route will be completly underground except mabey in the future extensions to the bronx or brooklyn.

[NX Express]

Question: Is any of this route going to be elevated or outside?

 

I love outdoor routes, so it would be awesome if the line was outside after 96th Street or something!

 

Manhattan + outside + subway = NIMBY disaster.

[Joe]

Its what happens when you tunnel through a swamp and you dont water proof the damn thing. I wonder how long before it needs a major rebuilding to keep fropm flodding or collapsing. As for the SAS, untill I'm ridding arain under 2nd Av, I doubt the whole project.

 

Really, swampland under Jamaica. I was expecting Honey Wagon material.

[Grand Concourse]

Wirelessly posted via (Mozilla/5.0 (Danger hiptop 4.6; U; rv:1.7.12) Gecko/20050920)

 

No the route will be completly underground except mabey in the future extensions to the bronx or brooklyn.

I seriously doubt there would be any elevated segments in Brooklyn. As for the Bronx, I'm not even sure making the concrete sound absorbent like the AirTrain structure will entice 3rd av residents to ok an el on their streets. I would think that portion would be a subway as well.

[firstmccmatt]

This was really fascinating and it makes me even more excited about the possibility of finally having a subway under 2nd Ave. It's WAY, WAY overdue. Thanks to the OP for sharing that video.

 

No problem!

[T to Dyre Avenue]

Wirelessly posted via (Mozilla/5.0 (Danger hiptop 4.6; U; rv:1.7.12) Gecko/20050920)

 

No the route will be completly underground except mabey in the future extensions to the bronx or brooklyn.

Only if the takes over an existing elevated route in the Bronx or Brooklyn. Or if it runs on existing outdoor right-of-way such as Amtrak's Northeast Corridor in the Bronx.

[Grand Concourse]

If they annexed the Pelham line to the SAS, that would be awesome. But I think they need to build 3rd Av more than to just annex an existing line since there's such a large gap between the Concourse and WPR lines.

[MTR Admiralty]

Only if the takes over an existing elevated route in the Bronx or Brooklyn. Or if it runs on existing outdoor right-of-way such as Amtrak's Northeast Corridor in the Bronx.

They tried that in the 70s I think. Right now, they ought to focus on federal funding for the other Manhattan segments. Otherwise, don't even think about other forms of expansion along the line.

[Ms. W Supporter]

Manhattan + outside + subway = NIMBY disaster.

 

Whats NIMBY?

 

Wirelessly posted via (Mozilla/5.0 (Danger hiptop 4.6; U; rv:1.7.12) Gecko/20050920)

 

No the route will be completly underground except mabey in the future extensions to the bronx or brooklyn.

 

Aw..hopefully its outside for the outerboroughs.

 

I seriously doubt there would be any elevated segments in Brooklyn. As for the Bronx, I'm not even sure making the concrete sound absorbent like the AirTrain structure will entice 3rd av residents to ok an el on their streets. I would think that portion would be a subway as well.

 

Is that why they are against outside lines? I would assume outside lines are easier, quicker, and cheaper to build.

 

Have we left the era of outside trains (not to mention trains with window seating)?

[MTR Admiralty]

NIMBY - Not In My Backyard < -- people who are initially against any form of construction. But when it gets done, not only do they benefit, they ask for more.

[Grand Concourse]

Is that why they are against outside lines? I would assume outside lines are easier, quicker, and cheaper to build.

 

Have we left the era of outside trains (not to mention trains with window seating)?

 

Let me put it this way. Say you live on a street and get moderate sunlight, then you find out a subway el will be built in front and will block out the sun. Would you support it or vote for a subway? It doesn't matter an el can be built faster there are people that don't want a subway on the streets. Everything has to be underground now.

[Dan05979]

excellent program, learned alot about the boring machine and freezing the soft ground for drilling.

[Ms. W Supporter]

Let me put it this way. Say you live on a street and get moderate sunlight, then you find out a subway el will be built in front and will block out the sun. Would you support it or vote for a subway? It doesn't matter an el can be built faster there are people that don't want a subway on the streets. Everything has to be underground now.

 

I'd love to live by train tracks! If I look for an apartment I would look for one where I can see the trains past...then again I'm not the masses.

 

Outside tracks were built in the past and I'm sure some, if not most people, didn't want it. It was built though, so I'm just wondering is the law/rules different now..?

[ParkStUnder]

Outside tracks were built in the past and I'm sure some, if not most people, didn't want it. It was built though, so I'm just wondering is the law/rules different now..?

 

For one thing the early El lines were built by private companies, not as subject to public opinion especially in those days.

 

However there were NIMBY's even back then, Here in Boston, in the 1890's when the first subway through downtown was being discussed, there was a proposal to build an elevated track along Tremont St. That proposal died after a newspaper published a doctored picture (using one of the early versions of Photoshop I guess ) showing what the structure would look like running past the historic structures it caused an uproar so in the end they took the wiser course to build a subway. (Of course I have to note: the first in North America, before New York ) The same thing happened with the Cambridge subway built at the turn of the century, originally proposed as an El.

[Grand Concourse]

I'd love to live by train tracks! If I look for an apartment I would look for one where I can see the trains past...then again I'm not the masses.

 

Outside tracks were built in the past and I'm sure some, if not most people, didn't want it. It was built though, so I'm just wondering is the law/rules different now..?

 

I think you missed my point, but try and think from the perspective of other people.

 

And to put it simply: back then the private companies could do whatever they want. However, today there are more laws and more NIMBY's or activist groups that would oppose els from being built. You'd have a better chance with a subway today than an el.

AirTrain is not a valid example as that is built over a highway and not on streets.

[LRG]

Doesn't property value go down if a building is located by elevated structures like highways and subway lines? I mean look at the Gowanus over Third Avenue!!! I wouldn't want to live by it at all as it is noisy as hell under there day in and day out. My sister used to live by the in Brooklyn yet I didn't mind it as subway traffic isn't constant like road traffic.

[Grand Concourse]

Very good point. Although there are a lot of highrises on the East side now, people don't want to see trains at eye level. And although I don't think there's that much of a problem of Brooklyn 3rd Av, that structure is an eyesore and needs to be replaced. It does kinda divide that part of brooklyn from the 'factories'. Also you add the polution there = terrible.

[Ms. W Supporter]

For one thing the early El lines were built by private companies, not as subject to public opinion especially in those days.

 

However there were NIMBY's even back then, Here in Boston, in the 1890's when the first subway through downtown was being discussed, there was a proposal to build an elevated track along Tremont St. That proposal died after a newspaper published a doctored picture (using one of the early versions of Photoshop I guess B) ) showing what the structure would look like running past the historic structures it caused an uproar so in the end they took the wiser course to build a subway. (Of course I have to note: the first in North America, before New York B) ) The same thing happened with the Cambridge subway built at the turn of the century, originally proposed as an El.

 

I think you missed my point, but try and think from the perspective of other people.

 

And to put it simply: back then the private companies could do whatever they want. However, today there are more laws and more NIMBY's or activist groups that would oppose els from being built. You'd have a better chance with a subway today than an el.

AirTrain is not a valid example as that is built over a highway and not on streets.

 

I see. Thanks for the information.

 

Aside from the laws, I think it would be cool to see more elevated/outdoor, but that's just me.

 

I think most of Japan's trains are elevated, but their laws/opinions are different...

[MTR Admiralty]

Doesn't property value go down if a building is located by elevated structures like highways and subway lines? I mean look at the Gowanus over Third Avenue!!! I wouldn't want to live by it at all as it is noisy as hell under there day in and day out. My sister used to live by the in Brooklyn yet I didn't mind it as subway traffic isn't constant like road traffic.

Look at Tremont and much of the South Bronx immediately around the CB Expressway.