Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Jcoltrane..there are already plenty of elevated lines in the boroughs...this is nothing new and somehow people live, happily, all along them, conduct business and enjoy having the trains. Haven't you noticed or are you the one on dope?
I personally prefer a street car to an elevated train, but I will happily take both. Start eliminating cars from the streets and bring in electric street cars like San Fran and build more trains. The city will become a more pedestrian friendly, less car centric place, like it should be.
And anyone who believes the success of NYC is built on cars is dumb, as is anyone who believes more public transportation in NYC is a bad idea. We are successful because we have a broad, fast, affordable mass transit system....adding MORE makes us MORE successful, not less. Take the cars off the road and keep them in the suburbs where they belong.
My biggest beef with street cars is the fact you will have to transfer at some point unless they go all the way down to Manhattan areas that you want to travel to. People hate to transfer. Better then a bus though. There should at least be a BRT down Third Avenue in the Bronx, down through Second Avenue in Manhattan.
The Second or the Third Avenue Elevated will never be rebuilt mainly, because of NIMBY's (Not In My Backyard people). These people will kill you if you try to build any elevated line, because they oppose it, and not just that elevated lines although cheaper by the mile, and although it's faster to construct will block sunlight, and generate a lot of noise. Although I am a supporter of elevated construction not much New Yorkers support it, and the images you posted aren't going to happen.
A two tracked line can also only support two services. Any more services will jam up the line, and not to mention the fact the Second Avenue Subway is a two tracked subway from 125th Street to Hanover Square. Also building an elevated structure also depends on the width of the street, and an elevated structure at best might only carry three tracks so there won't be any frequent express service, but there might be peak direction service like those on the (7) line, but that won't happen, because of NIMBY's. Face it the Second Avenue Line will be a subway it won't matter if you like it or not.
I doubt you're going to have significant opposition to an elevated structure in those sections of The Bronx. It isn't like the Sheridan Expressway, where people complain of the noise, while they don't see the benefits of it, as a lot of the people in that area don't own cars.
In those areas, the people will benefit: They'll have to deal with the noise, but they'll have much better transit service.
It is possible to have a 4-track el if the street is wide enough. I used to live in Brighton Beach, where the el was 4 tracks.
That being said, the immediate area around the el does tend to decay a bit (though the types of buildings along Third Avenue are already similar to the types of buildings in other neighborhoods next to els: Mostly tenement-type buildings and housing projects).
Obviously, a subway would be the best of all worlds assuming that there was funding for it, but I'm not holding my breath.
(though the types of buildings along Third Avenue are already similar to the types of buildings in other neighborhoods next to els: Mostly tenement-type buildings and housing projects).
An EL is preposterous. Rebuilding what was torn down for good reason is BEYOND preposterous. One of the genius moves of NYC was determining that all wiring should be below ground. How many thousands of times more important to get public transport underground as well.
Can streets be made more hideous than running trains 4 or more stories up? Look at Astoria, Broadway in Riverdale, Brighton Beach, East Broadway. Eventually, a LONG eventually, the city will demolish all its EL'S...assuming the U.S. remains a first world country for the next century, a big assumption.
Practically speaking, I will be VERY happy if they just get Phase 1 of the Second Avenue Subway built before I expire. That is the connection between 63rd and Lex and 96th and Second. Since the line was started in 1929, I don't think that's too much to ask. The City, the State, the Country simply don't have the capital and the will to fill potholes much less build bridges and tunnels anymore...that was for another time long ago.
If they can get up to 105th and down into the East Village, that would be icing on the cake...but I won't hold my breath.
But as for ELS or other more elaborate connections into the outer boroughs, I doubt that any of us reading these posts will live long enough to see any of it.
So now if I can JUST get down to the F train at 63rd without a bus in a reasonable number of years, I can die happy. I neither ask nor expect anything more.
An EL is preposterous. Rebuilding what was torn down for good reason is BEYOND preposterous.
As I thought I'd explained earlier, the els in Manhattan weren't torn down for a good reason--they were torn down because the business community didn't like them, and put pressure on Mayor LaGuardia, who was biased against them anyway. Ridership levels dictated that all the els in Manhattan should have been left alone. Elevated lines are both faster and less expensive to build than subways. And modern technology has the capability to eliminate much of the old argument about noise--have you ever visited Miami and experienced Metrorail? You can stand right under the elevated structure and--it's true!--still carry on a conversation.
Our main problems with necessary expansions of the transit system here in New York involve such concepts as bureaucracy, lack of accountability and dishonesty. Think about it: the original IRT subway from Brooklyn Bridge to 145 Street was constructed in four years (1900-1904) using shovels, pick-axes and the occasional stick of dynamite. The Second Avenue line will take well over a decade and a half to build, using state-of-the-art equipment. (And I'm talking about Phase One, not the entire line!)
The difference between today and 1900 is the dozens of "Enviormental Impact statements", Community meetings where grumpy old ladies make themselves feel powerful by being obstructionist, Polticial rangling to get things funded and the corruption that goes with that, and then the union/mobbed up construction contracters driving up construction costs. All of this overseen by a NYS "Public Corporation" that is constitutionally answerable to no one (The MTA).
Plus, the NYC of 1900 still had something to prove. London/Paris still dominated and here at home Chicago was on the up. NYC had to get things going on another level to compete and our mass transit system is a part of that. Nowanddays, NYers are cocky and feel the good times are always going to be here, so there's no motiviation nor hunger to get it done.
why did they take them down to begin with and then give it to the Japanese for free to make cars and sell them back to us.
If memory serves Bombardier is a German company.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Where's Sobro?
