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.
Via Garibaldi 8

Full 14th St Shutdown Cancelled

Recommended Posts

5 hours ago, R68OnBroadway said:

Definitely going to stay off the (L) for the next few years... not getting myself cancer in 60 years because some governor wanted to be a "hero".

I always preferred the less crowded, quieter more scenic (M) anyways...

 

5 hours ago, Deucey said:

Me too. Or the old ferry when I worked in Greendesk on Kent.

I made the same decision the moment the news broke.

I do sometimes work in Williamsburg and frankly, I will definitely avoid that section for the foreseeable future. Too many things are wrong and all the right questions have been ignored.

I can only hope the worst doesn't happen. Then again, with all I heard from the horses mouth, it may actually be inevitable. Too much evidence to swing to the more positive side.

困ったおまえたち。。。

(We're in trouble...)

Edited by LTA1992

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, MysteriousBtrain said:

It's more half-half imo but the problem is more than just "repairing the tunnel faster". The silica dust plays a role in the shutdown and based on Cuomo's plan there is no guarantee that you can clean it up in time and not get New Yorkers who ride the (L) sick. 

Actually, most people (I know) who are fighting the plan now are just worried about the silica dust.

I've brought up the silica dust thing with my co-workers, who are pretty well educated folks but are not railfans, and they stare back with blank stares. I don't think many people know what the issue is, to be honest. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Union Tpke said:

It won't go down quietly, but because of the setup of the Board, there is NO WAY for them to stop it. I want them to fight. I want advocates to fight. I want politicians to fight. The truth is that the voters of New York voted to reelect this clown, and we have to deal with his garbage for the next four years.

I have contacted my representatives State Senator Addabbo and Assemblyman Hevesi, and I urge others here to do the same.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Around the Horn said:

As I understand it, the "old" pick with the (L) to/from Bedford only is still in effect. RTO (and by extension TWU) can throw a big wrench in whatever Cuomo wants to do by simply not re-picking.

From what I've seen actual MTA employees don't like this new plan at all.

The thing is, that Cuomo is very friendly with the TWU. While the rank-and-file won't be happy, I am sure leadership will stand with him.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, MysteriousBtrain said:

It's more half-half imo but the problem is more than just "repairing the tunnel faster". The silica dust plays a role in the shutdown and based on Cuomo's plan there is no guarantee that you can clean it up in time and not get New Yorkers who ride the (L) sick. 

Actually, most people (I know) who are fighting the plan now are just worried about the silica dust.

I have no confidence that they will clean it up every night in time for service. Five hours of wrench time is not enough. WSP had no competition, and as far as I know, they don't have any real harsh penalties for delaying the start of full revenue service or the project's completion. I hope they are monitored. The last things we need is having the project completed and then having to go back to redo it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You think some group concerned about how the new plan could have unintended consequences will go to court to try to force the (MTA) to go back to the original plan, overriding Cuomo's orders?

I can see some group doing such at least to force Cuomo to admit he ordered this:

1. For his ego

2. His fear an (L) shutdown would derail any bid for President in 2020.

3. His donors ordered him to do it, citing fear of massive traffic problems in Manhattan.  

Edited by Wallyhorse

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, MysteriousBtrain said:

It's more half-half imo but the problem is more than just "repairing the tunnel faster". The silica dust plays a role in the shutdown and based on Cuomo's plan there is no guarantee that you can clean it up in time and not get New Yorkers who ride the (L) sick. 

Actually, most people (I know) who are fighting the plan now are just worried about the silica dust.

Which is why I would not be surprised if some group who can prove this now files a lawsuit to force the (MTA) to return to the original plan, overriding Cuomo's orders and potentially derailing any Presidential aspirations Cuomo seems to have. 

Share this post


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

What I just posted on 2AvSagas' comments:

"Mr Byford and the entirety of the non-Cuomo board (and Cuomo appointees with consciences) should resign in protest; DeBlasio should not appoint replacements, and et cetera.
But we know that backbone and conscience are in short supply when it comes to New York politics."

http://secondavenuesagas.com/2019/01/18/cuomos-end-run-around-mta-board-complete-as-l-train-shutdown-is-officially-canceled/

Even if Byford et al were to resign en masse, what's to stop Cuomo from placing more yes-men in charge of the sub-agencies and the board? We all know that's what Cuomo wants, so why should they give him that satisfaction? It's a much better counter-argument if these guys were fired for not going along with this plan rather than them just quit due to differences in opinion.

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Lance said:

Even if Byford et al were to resign en masse, what's to stop Cuomo from placing more yes-men in charge of the sub-agencies and the board? We all know that's what Cuomo wants, so why should they give him that satisfaction? It's a much better counter-argument if these guys were fired for not going along with this plan rather than them just quit due to differences in opinion.

Or better yet, waiting out Cuomo in the hopes he is impeached or forced out or is NOT re-elected in 2022. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, Around the Horn said:

The board will be fuming next week. I personally can't wait.

This what, to me, might be the last glimpse of hope for avoiding Cuomo's plans. If the board really raises hell, and it can become clear to the public why they are so against it (and how much they've stripped from the board and Byford, like being able to conduct an independent review before the new plan is enacted), there might be just a chance Cuomo gets some real vocal opposition from not just the board, but the masses also. 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Enjineer said:

This what, to me, might be the last glimpse of hope for avoiding Cuomo's plans. If the board really raises hell, and it can become clear to the public why they are so against it (and how much they've stripped from the board and Byford, like being able to conduct an independent review before the new plan is enacted), there might be just a chance Cuomo gets some real vocal opposition from not just the board, but the masses also. 

Likely doesn't matter to Cuomo, especially if his donors ordered him to do this.

It more likely will take some groups taking Cuomo and the (MTA) to court to force the (MTA) to return to the original plan.  Then, and only then might we get the real truth. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Wallyhorse said:

It more likely will take some groups taking Cuomo and the (MTA) to court to force the (MTA) to return to the original plan.  Then, and only then might we get the real truth. 

That's what I'm saying. If the public realizes stuff like the risk of silica inhalation without proper cleanup, I could see legal action taken by advocacy groups and such to try and halt the new plans. Maybe the normal NIMBY forces would be handy in this case :P

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, QM1to6Ave said:

I've brought up the silica dust thing with my co-workers, who are pretty well educated folks but are not railfans, and they stare back with blank stares. I don't think many people know what the issue is, to be honest. 

Just mention it's a carcinogen and than should do the trick.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Around the Horn said:

Just mention it's a carcinogen and than should do the trick.

"Have you or a loved one been diagnosed with (insert cancer here) after riding the (L) train in 2019 and 2020..."

I can already imagine the ads in the future

  • LMAO! 9
  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Okay, slow it down. 

Let me clarify ahead of all I'm not supporting the govs mandate that this plan change and much less am I supporting the way he's going about it. 

1: I think we're overplaying the risk of silica dust here. The actual airborne concentration that gets into a train or into the stations adjacent to the tube is likely to remain far below actionable levels. The ill effects of respirable crystalline silica generally manifest in workers who have a decade of all-day exposure - and generally this is silicosis, not cancer. In any event, the airborne concentration would have to be so high that the air in the car becomes hazy for the few minutes in the tunnel to become truly hazardous. You probably breathe more going into your basement. 

Besides, the dust mitigation necessary at montague was largely due to the fact that the entire benchwall was demolished. With only short sections of the benchwall being removed - I don't think they'll get close to that level - also this is a macroscopic physical contaminant that is really quite easily sampled for. I'm sure that people outside the MTA will also do their own tests.  

Silica dust is a physical contaminant and a carcinogen. Though: Coffee is a carcinogen, better cut that out too. Tea also, any hot drink really. Also smoke detectors are radioactive so you can't have fire safety anymore either. No - people hear something is hazardous and they think it's like nerve gas where one drop will turn you inside out but in reality it's about monitoring and moderating exposure. 

360,000 people a year die from overexposure to Dihydrogen Monoxide - better ban it now.

(that would be water)

I'm not saying that the levels of silica dust - really all respirable airborne particulate - shouldn't be monitored carefully during construction inside and outside of trains. I'm just saying it's not super difficult to monitor. But, literally in the Columbia presentation, two key bullet points. 

  • Establish detailed evaluation of control options for dust and airborne silica
  • Third-party review of air quality

Okay. Looks like they're aware of the issue and will be monitoring it and having a 3rd party verify. Works for me.  

2: From an engineering perspective, the physical work, the actual study, the academically reviewed plan is solid. I have worked with some of these people. We're talking about the deans of world renowned engineering schools working with people who have written PhD theses on structural health monitoring. People saying "we looked at your plan it didn't work" aren't really diving in and checking the math. 

The problem isn't the plan, it's the absurd way this was all done. "Surprise it's cancelled, no it's fine I have experts!" like some kind of father-knows-best BS - and for that reason I don't support it. From an engineering standpoint it looks fine - but like, idiot cuomo should have let the interested parties give it the diligence, don't decide via press release. As you were.

 

damn Sure i'm gonna get roasted for this all but I gots to says it. 

  • Thumbs Up 1
  • Upvote 2

Share this post


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

"Have you or a loved one been diagnosed with (insert cancer here) after riding the (L) train in 2019 and 2020..."

I can already imagine the ads in the future

Sad but true.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

These bylaws are more recent. Trying to look through it now:

http://web.mta.info/mta/compliance/pdf/By_Laws.pdf

Ill add this to the post too. Section 4 is definitely a good read:

http://web.mta.info/mta/compliance/pdf/Board_Code_of_Ethics_Nov_19_2014.pdf

Edited by MysteriousBtrain
Another link added
  • Upvote 2

Share this post


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

Even if Byford et al were to resign en masse, what's to stop Cuomo from placing more yes-men in charge of the sub-agencies and the board? We all know that's what Cuomo wants, so why should they give him that satisfaction? It's a much better counter-argument if these guys were fired for not going along with this plan rather than them just quit due to differences in opinion.

Because resignation in protest is a political damage mechanism.

Had that happened, the political outrage from the elites would've either tempered that dumbass from Queens, forced the project to be evaluated fully before abandoning the shutdown, or led to more "interesting" actions in Albany regarding the Governor's performance.

(Notwithstanding, the MTA enabling legislation leaves it to where he can't appoint more than 4 or 5 to the 12 person board. DeBlasio might be a wuss, but he'd put his own slate up, AND they'd have to find another Byford - which now would become harder because every potential candidate would see how Cuomo acted and would decline unless they got some "job security" language forcing him to walk the walk of 'not controlling the (MTA)."

That's what R-i-P's are - the wedge to (if done successfully) turn outrage onto the government of the day to force it away from bad policy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This thread shouldn’t have been made. It needs to be merged with one of the TWO (L) shutdown threads. What purpose does thread serve? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, R68OnBroadway said:

Definitely going to stay off the (L) for the next few years... not getting myself cancer in 60 years because some governor wanted to be a "hero".

I always preferred the less crowded, quieter more scenic (M) anyways...

Same here. Not taking my risks.

Share this post


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

Okay, slow it down. 

Let me clarify ahead of all I'm not supporting the govs mandate that this plan change and much less am I supporting the way he's going about it. 

1: I think we're overplaying the risk of silica dust here. The actual airborne concentration that gets into a train or into the stations adjacent to the tube is likely to remain far below actionable levels. The ill effects of respirable crystalline silica generally manifest in workers who have a decade of all-day exposure - and generally this is silicosis, not cancer. In any event, the airborne concentration would have to be so high that the air in the car becomes hazy for the few minutes in the tunnel to become truly hazardous. You probably breathe more going into your basement. 

Besides, the dust mitigation necessary at montague was largely due to the fact that the entire benchwall was demolished. With only short sections of the benchwall being removed - I don't think they'll get close to that level - also this is a macroscopic physical contaminant that is really quite easily sampled for. I'm sure that people outside the MTA will also do their own tests.  

Silica dust is a physical contaminant and a carcinogen. Though: Coffee is a carcinogen, better cut that out too. Tea also, any hot drink really. Also smoke detectors are radioactive so you can't have fire safety anymore either. No - people hear something is hazardous and they think it's like nerve gas where one drop will turn you inside out but in reality it's about monitoring and moderating exposure. 

360,000 people a year die from overexposure to Dihydrogen Monoxide - better ban it now.

(that would be water)

I'm not saying that the levels of silica dust - really all respirable airborne particulate - shouldn't be monitored carefully during construction inside and outside of trains. I'm just saying it's not super difficult to monitor. But, literally in the Columbia presentation, two key bullet points. 

  • Establish detailed evaluation of control options for dust and airborne silica
  • Third-party review of air quality

Okay. Looks like they're aware of the issue and will be monitoring it and having a 3rd party verify. Works for me.  

2: From an engineering perspective, the physical work, the actual study, the academically reviewed plan is solid. I have worked with some of these people. We're talking about the deans of world renowned engineering schools working with people who have written PhD theses on structural health monitoring. People saying "we looked at your plan it didn't work" aren't really diving in and checking the math. 

The problem isn't the plan, it's the absurd way this was all done. "Surprise it's cancelled, no it's fine I have experts!" like some kind of father-knows-best BS - and for that reason I don't support it. From an engineering standpoint it looks fine - but like, idiot cuomo should have let the interested parties give it the diligence, don't decide via press release. As you were.

 

damn Sure i'm gonna get roasted for this all but I gots to says it. 

Thank you! I really think the negativity level around this is more about people hating Cuomo than actual details of the plan

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, QM1to6Ave said:

Thank you! I really think the negativity level around this is more about people hating Cuomo than actual details of the plan

 

And the actual details of the plan are?......

  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Enjineer said:

"Have you or a loved one been diagnosed with (insert cancer here) after riding the (L) train in 2019 and 2020..."

I can already imagine the ads in the future

So can I. Time to get dust masks on if I ever have to ride the (L) between 14th Street-Union Sq and Grand St.

  • LMAO! 1
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


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

Okay, slow it down. 

Let me clarify ahead of all I'm not supporting the govs mandate that this plan change and much less am I supporting the way he's going about it. 

1: I think we're overplaying the risk of silica dust here. The actual airborne concentration that gets into a train or into the stations adjacent to the tube is likely to remain far below actionable levels. The ill effects of respirable crystalline silica generally manifest in workers who have a decade of all-day exposure - and generally this is silicosis, not cancer. In any event, the airborne concentration would have to be so high that the air in the car becomes hazy for the few minutes in the tunnel to become truly hazardous. You probably breathe more going into your basement. 

Besides, the dust mitigation necessary at montague was largely due to the fact that the entire benchwall was demolished. With only short sections of the benchwall being removed - I don't think they'll get close to that level - also this is a macroscopic physical contaminant that is really quite easily sampled for. I'm sure that people outside the MTA will also do their own tests.  

Silica dust is a physical contaminant and a carcinogen. Though: Coffee is a carcinogen, better cut that out too. Tea also, any hot drink really. Also smoke detectors are radioactive so you can't have fire safety anymore either. No - people hear something is hazardous and they think it's like nerve gas where one drop will turn you inside out but in reality it's about monitoring and moderating exposure. 

360,000 people a year die from overexposure to Dihydrogen Monoxide - better ban it now.

(that would be water)

I'm not saying that the levels of silica dust - really all respirable airborne particulate - shouldn't be monitored carefully during construction inside and outside of trains. I'm just saying it's not super difficult to monitor. But, literally in the Columbia presentation, two key bullet points. 

  • Establish detailed evaluation of control options for dust and airborne silica
  • Third-party review of air quality

Okay. Looks like they're aware of the issue and will be monitoring it and having a 3rd party verify. Works for me.  

2: From an engineering perspective, the physical work, the actual study, the academically reviewed plan is solid. I have worked with some of these people. We're talking about the deans of world renowned engineering schools working with people who have written PhD theses on structural health monitoring. People saying "we looked at your plan it didn't work" aren't really diving in and checking the math. 

The problem isn't the plan, it's the absurd way this was all done. "Surprise it's cancelled, no it's fine I have experts!" like some kind of father-knows-best BS - and for that reason I don't support it. From an engineering standpoint it looks fine - but like, idiot cuomo should have let the interested parties give it the diligence, don't decide via press release. As you were.

 

Damn sure I'm gonna get roasted for this all but I gots to says it. 

If you've studied math at a rigorous level (proof-based), you'd undoubtedly agree that nothing is considered "correct" until a logical argument is found universally true for each and every case that exists. Anyone has the right to maintain their skepticism until they correctly deduce a proof for themselves. You claim that "the academically-reviewed plan is solid." Disregard the research that Columbia University has conducted for a moment. Have you conducted comparable research for a dissertation to support the implied notion that you are qualified to make such a judgment? Where are you getting all these statistics in your post from? You haven't cited any links to validate that your individual argument is factual. Also, the words "dihydrogen monoxide" are rarely used in place of "water" in contemporary society. Excuse the oppositional tone of my post, but using flowery language in an attempt to convince others that you're knowledgeable and competent in a particular subject is nothing short of pretentious.

  • Thanks 1
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×

Important Information

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