Juelz4309 Posted January 26, 2014 Share #1 Posted January 26, 2014 Just always wondered why the 6 line is underground in the bronx up till just outside hunts point ave? All the other IRT Lines Come above ground pretty much in the lower bronx... but the 6 travels quite a way before becomes elevated... And How Come The B/D Concourse line wasnt elevated? Especially with the concourse being as wide as it is.. Are these a topography issue? (high water table,etc) with both lines? It seems that its been always cheaper to build above ground then below for the obvious reasons... I rode the 6 earlier this afternoon to see a co worker to Elder and I was just thinkin to maself...this line is still underground after like 5 stops in the bronx......lol...Just lookin for a lil insight as to the construction method for these particular lines...Appreciate yall! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PATCOman Posted January 26, 2014 Share #2 Posted January 26, 2014 If you notice, most of the IND lines are underground. IDK why the 6 is underground that far in the Bronx though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vistausss Posted January 26, 2014 Share #3 Posted January 26, 2014 IIRC the Concourse had indeed something to do with the high water table. Dunno about the though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
R32sdabest Posted January 26, 2014 Share #4 Posted January 26, 2014 174-175th Sts subway station are technically above ground Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
realizm Posted January 26, 2014 Share #5 Posted January 26, 2014 On the IRT Pelham Bay Park Line, the ROW travels through geological areas of high elevation and also yes possibly the higher water table. Definitely that was the case with the Lexington Ave line in Manhattan as a comparison, with the portion north of Grand Central actually built as part of the Dual Contracts not the IRT. With the Lexington Ave Subway extended out of the original Lafayette St subway (South of Grand Central Station to Brooklyn Bridge City Hall then to Bowling Green) the Dual Contract engineers doubledecked the subway with one of the major reasons being that they were tunneling into a area of high elevation in an area where the water table was higher than normal (The other being innovative engineering to quickly have trains feed into the Lex from the Bronx lines from two points.) Therefore Dual Contract engineers must have opted to build an underground subway on the portion of the from 3rd Ave -138th Street to Hunts Point Ave as opposed to a elevated structure throughout in the Bronx to Pelham Bay Park for this reason - geological issues concerning high elevation levels. This has been the general practice in subway construction, where architects encounter areas of high ground elevation they will use tunnels and deep bore construction, generally speaking. I'm in agreement with all points on the IND Grand Concourse Line to answer the question in the OP. The IND is a different story however, as the practice from scratch was to strictly build subways, that is, until the IND Second System was being designed which did take building elevated structures into consideration. Anyway thats my theory as we only have indirect sources available on this one concerning the IRT Pelham Bay Line. That was a tough question Juelz. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FRACertifyMotormen Posted January 26, 2014 Share #6 Posted January 26, 2014 Incidentally, as originally planned, the IND Concourse line was supposed to be a four-track line. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MHV9218 Posted January 26, 2014 Share #7 Posted January 26, 2014 There is also a historical element to it. Give or take a few years for my memory, the to Pelham Bay Park was completed by 1920. Those first stations (specifically 3 Ave-138th, which opened first) are extremely old stations, which you can tell by the ornate mosaics and structure. At that point in time, you still had the idea of pneumatic tubes as a popular concept, and tunnel travel was seen as the best solution. The , on the other hand, was a 1940 IND-creation, in an era when elevated subways were much more popular for outer borough travel. Probably all comes down to cost, in any case. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vistausss Posted January 26, 2014 Share #8 Posted January 26, 2014 Probably all comes down to cost, in any case. And public acceptance. Some neighbourhood communites might (and that was also the case back then) dislike the idea of an elevated structure in their neighbourhood... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MHV9218 Posted January 26, 2014 Share #9 Posted January 26, 2014 And public acceptance. Some neighbourhood communites might (and that was also the case back then) dislike the idea of an elevated structure in their neighbourhood... True...by the 1940s we were also in the heyday of Robert Moses's "f**k You Poor People and Outer Borough Residents" tour, and I doubt he gave a damn about elevateds being built. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bobtehpanda Posted January 27, 2014 Share #10 Posted January 27, 2014 True...by the 1940s we were also in the heyday of Robert Moses's "f**k You Poor People and Outer Borough Residents" tour, and I doubt he gave a damn about elevateds being built. Hatred of els stretches back at least to the 20s. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SubwayGuy Posted January 30, 2014 Share #11 Posted January 30, 2014 The city was not building Els anymore by the time the Concourse was built. If you look at the outdoor portions of the "IND" they either trace back to the BMT originally (such as the A out to Lefferts on the old Fulton El, or all the BMT south Brooklyn pieces which are now connected to IND lines), or have something else going on like the IND takeover of the disused LIRR trackage that became the Rockaway Line. Otherwise, 8th Ave., 6th Ave., Queens Blvd., Fulton St. (subway), Crosstown, Concourse, and the IND portion of Culver (Jay->Church) are all entirely underground. The only outdoor station constructed for the IND during this time was the World's Fair station (which used part of Jamaica Yard to access), which is also not coincidentally the only one that closed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StevenFrancis Posted January 30, 2014 Share #12 Posted January 30, 2014 Isnt the Culver Viaduct (Smith/9th Streets and 4th Avenue) the only part the original IND build above ground though? So there is a little exception to that Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jsunflyguy Posted January 30, 2014 Share #13 Posted January 30, 2014 Minus the 174-175th St elevated tunnel, yes. The original IND revenue track is almost entirely underground except Smith-9/4th Ave. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
realizm Posted January 30, 2014 Share #14 Posted January 30, 2014 Isnt the Culver Viaduct (Smith/9th Streets and 4th Avenue) the only part the original IND build above ground though? So there is a little exception to that Minus the 174-175th St elevated tunnel, yes. The original IND revenue track is almost entirely underground except Smith-9/4th Ave. Exactly. The IND built the Culver Viaduct as an elevated structure to cut on expenses as opposed to constructing tubes which would have been more costly. In the case of 174th-175th Streets on the IND GC, the tunnel goes over a bridge I guess due to the geological depressions that the Grand Concourse road throughway runs through in this area: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:175_Concourse_line_underpass_jeh.JPG Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SubwayGuy Posted February 1, 2014 Share #15 Posted February 1, 2014 Isnt the Culver Viaduct (Smith/9th Streets and 4th Avenue) the only part the original IND build above ground though? So there is a little exception to that Yes. Just like 125th and Broadway on the IRT, it was a matter of practicality / near-necessity, not personal choice, to construct it that way. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Union Tpke Posted February 3, 2014 Share #16 Posted February 3, 2014 The world's Fair route was at grade. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vistausss Posted February 3, 2014 Share #17 Posted February 3, 2014 Yup, I remember those photos, saw them some time last year Come to think of it: -Whatever happened to the World's Fair? I never see anything about it anymore, anywhere in the world. -And what happened to the area after the last World's Fair in NYC? Has the area been built upon or did it return to grass and nature like it was before? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bobtehpanda Posted February 4, 2014 Share #18 Posted February 4, 2014 Yup, I remember those photos, saw them some time last year Come to think of it: -Whatever happened to the World's Fair? I never see anything about it anymore, anywhere in the world. -And what happened to the area after the last World's Fair in NYC? Has the area been built upon or did it return to grass and nature like it was before? The World's Fair has turned into the World Expo, and the last big one that anybody cared about was the one in Shanghai (2010?) Other important ones include the Vancouver one in the '80s, which led to the construction of the Vancouver Skytrain. The World's Fair site was not dismantled and has essentially turned into a fetid, decrepit mess. Various parts of it are falling apart, and the various ponds around the site are now completely stagnant. It's like what Athens' Olympic district became after their Games. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TeeLow Posted February 4, 2014 Share #19 Posted February 4, 2014 Yup, I remember those photos, saw them some time last year Come to think of it: -Whatever happened to the World's Fair? I never see anything about it anymore, anywhere in the world. -And what happened to the area after the last World's Fair in NYC? Has the area been built upon or did it return to grass and nature like it was before? The next World's Fair will be in Milan, Italy in 2015. The term "World's Fair" is now called The Expo, short for The Universal & International Exposition, which started with the Expo in Montreal, Canada in 1967. The 1964 New York World's Fair location is now the USTA National Tennis Center resides and is where The US Open Grand Slam event is played, opening in 1978 at Flushing Meadow Park on the Willets Pt. stop on the . Shea Stadium opened in 1964 across the street from The World's Fair. The stadium is gone, replaced by Citi Field. I believe the silver unisphere, a memorable symbol of the '64 Fair, is still there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fresh Pond Posted February 4, 2014 Share #20 Posted February 4, 2014 The Unisphere along with the 2 observation towers are still there. The fate of the towers is uncertain, and is still closed Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TeeLow Posted February 4, 2014 Share #21 Posted February 4, 2014 The Unisphere along with the 2 observation towers are still there. The fate of the towers is uncertain, and is still closed Thanks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lance Posted February 4, 2014 Share #22 Posted February 4, 2014 If I'm not mistaken, some developer donning some serious rose-colored glasses had some grand scheme for revitalizing the World's Fair area a few years ago. Of course, that was before the recession hit, so those ideas naturally fell through. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bobtehpanda Posted February 4, 2014 Share #23 Posted February 4, 2014 The next World's Fair will be in Milan, Italy in 2015. The term "World's Fair" is now called The Expo, short for The Universal & International Exposition, which started with the Expo in Montreal, Canada in 1967. The 1964 New York World's Fair location is now the USTA National Tennis Center resides and is where The US Open Grand Slam event is played, opening in 1978 at Flushing Meadow Park on the Willets Pt. stop on the . Shea Stadium opened in 1964 across the street from The World's Fair. The stadium is gone, replaced by Citi Field. I believe the silver unisphere, a memorable symbol of the '64 Fair, is still there. The Unisphere is there, but it's also the only part of the Fair site they managed to keep in a good condition. The rest of it is about as crappy as the rest of Corona Park (which really, really needs some help from the Parks Department or a conservancy or what have you) If I'm not mistaken, some developer donning some serious rose-colored glasses had some grand scheme for revitalizing the World's Fair area a few years ago. Of course, that was before the recession hit, so those ideas naturally fell through. MLS wanted a soccer stadium on the Industry pond, which no one who actually used the park thought was a good idea, so it was shelved. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TeeLow Posted February 4, 2014 Share #24 Posted February 4, 2014 The Unisphere is there, but it's also the only part of the Fair site they managed to keep in a good condition. The rest of it is about as crappy as the rest of Corona Park (which really, really needs some help from the Parks Department or a conservancy or what have you) There was a rezoning issue along College Pt. Blvd. and the surrounding area. Bloomberg wanted the salvage yards gone. Was this ever resolved and could that possibly have something to do with why the funds for a redo of the park was never appropriated or considered a high enough priority? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bobtehpanda Posted February 4, 2014 Share #25 Posted February 4, 2014 There was a rezoning issue along College Pt. Blvd. and the surrounding area. Bloomberg wanted the salvage yards gone. Was this ever resolved and could that possibly have something to do with why the funds for a redo of the park was never appropriated or considered a high enough priority? Willets Point redevelopment is going on as planned. The problem with developing Corona Park is that it essentially serves as a giant wetlands buffer; if you look at the updated FEMA flood zone map, all of Corona Park is Zones 1 & 2, but immediately outside of the Corona Park boundaries are much higher Zones (5, 6, or no zones at all.) There's also a law on the books in Albany that says that any parkland used in a public project must be replaced. The MLS stadium would've needed to find "replacement" parkland, and there isn't any undeveloped space available. A big, big part of the reason why Corona Park doesn't get funding, though, is due to how parks in this city are run. The Parks Department itself suffers very large cuts every year, but the "flagship" parks (Central Park, High Line, Prospect, Union Sq, Washington Sq, etc.) are all run by nonprofit conservancies that get millions from donors. In fact, people put money into Central Park with the condition that it can't be used for other city parks. Combine this with the fact that Corona Park is the hardest big park to actually enter due to the fact that it's completely surrounded by highways, and you can see why the park has never been the crown jewel Moses wanted it to be. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.