Construction on the 2nd Ave. line in Manhatten was started but never completed. I’m not sure what the state of the project is but I have heard that the tunnel is there but it’s never been finishe, connected or have the stations been built.
A couple of years ago, when the economy was strong there was a lot of talk about resuming the project. Since 9/11 and the fiscal crisis in New York completion of the project is looking more and more like a pipe dream. The project will never get completed without Federal money and it doesn’t help that the current administration is run by oil men that hate New York and see no votes there.
Indeed, Collounsbury, almost half of the “subway” system’s route miles are above ground. Many of these were pre-existing elevated lines that were stitched into the subway network between 1910 and 1955.
I’m not holding my breath on the 2nd Avenue, which in fact demonstrates the perils of trying to build rail transit in existing neighborhoods. Y’see, the early lines were funded in much the same way that our western railroads were: the two private companies, the Interborough Rapid Transit and the Brooklyn Rapid Transit,* owned big chunks what was then undeveloped land in the outer boroughs. Their subways and elevateds increased the value of that property to such a degree that the whole entity made money. (But not for long. Post-W.W.I. inflation made the standard nickel fare unsustainable, but working class New Yorkers so depended on it that politicians stymied every increase for 35 years - until 1953.)
The Independent system (the Sixth and Eighth avenue lines), which began construction in the 20s, was designed to connect existing neighborhoods - and was a financial catastrophe. Originally, the city had hoped to build it and then turn it over to a private operator, but nobody wanted it. And since it was specifically designed to compete with the private transit companies’ elevateds (On Sixth and Ninth avenues in Manhattan and Fulton Street in Brooklyn), it effectively destroyed their finances, too, forcing a merger in 1940 with the city in control.
This will mark the third really serious attempt at building the Second Avenue line. According to Stan Fischler’s The Subway (H&M Productions II, 1997), voters in 1951 approved a $500 million bond offering, $446 million of which was to go to the Second Avenue. But decades of maintaining an artificially low nickel fare meant that the rest of the system was a mess. So that money ended up repairing the existing lines instead, and extending many of the tiny IRT local stations so they could handle trains more than four cars long.
Construction actually started during the profligate Lindsay administration of the early 1970s, with a few small sections dug. But the fiscal crisis of 1975-76 ended that. Given that our current revenue shortfalls are, if anything, even worse, and our state and local governments are doing their best to ensure an even longer recession, I’m betting it’ll fail again. The sad fact is, the city has managed to live without a second East Side rapid transit alternative since the Third Avenue El was demolished in 1955. What’s another coupla decades?
Forgot my *: The BRT became the BMT - a term you still here some New Yorkers use - when it recovered from bankruptcy after the Malbone Street Wreck of 1918.
Surface-level light rail lines are cheaper to build than subway lines – I don’t know the cost differential, but I know it’s there, since light rail requires no digging or tunnelling. Light rail lines are generally not as fast as subways because, unless provided with overpasses, they have to stop at some paved-road intersections. Here in Tampa, there’s been a (not very successful) movement for several years to build a county-wide light rail system. Nobody suggests a subway system – probably because of the cost difference, and because we have adequate space here for surface-level rights-of-way, but mainly because the water table is so high around here and it would be problematic to keep a subway tunnel dry. That’s why almost none of our homes or buildings have basements.
By the way, does anybody know what ever happened to monorails? They were supposed to be a cheaper-to-build, more-versatile form of mass transit – but very few cities ever built monorail systems. It’s something we associate with Disneyworld, and that “Simpsons” episode.
I would point out one disagreement I have with some fo the sentiments in this thread regarding constuctions in bad times.
Actually, according to classic Keyensian economics a bad economy is exaclty the time to undertake massive capital improvements. Cash is cheap (the interest rates are low, private enterprises are being conservative so there is not as much competition for capital, thus it is a borrower’s market). Investing publicly backed funds in a massive state-orchestrated building project creates jobs: the constructions workers, the coffee shops & bodegas that sell them lunch, the stores and services that benefit from them spending their paychecks, etc.
A project, particualry one such as the 2nd or 3rd avenue subway (a 1st and a 3rd make most sense to me) that will almost certainly result in long term economic benefit is a great idea. Now, IANA economist, but it all seems pretty obvious to me, unfortunately we’re still laboring under the influence of Reaganites and their devotion to Friedman (trickle down theory, et al.), so the biggest obstacle to the expansion of the subway remains political. I should also note that political opposition to eastside lines also stems from many eastside residents who are used to living with poor subway access, and would rather just keep on with the status quo than deal with 10-12 years of massive upheaval.
I think the issue with monorails is that they’re considered eyesores…not by me, and probably not by the OP, but by vociferous homeowner groups who have the ear of local government. As much as the cost, this is what killed the proposed light rail line between Santa Monica and downtown L.A.
You wouldn’t think so, but apparently such a nut-and-bolt necessity such as public transit is too odious to be visible in their neighborhoods. As if it were open sewers, or something.
Nevertheless strip malls and box stores spread apace. Go figure.
The first actual building of the SAS took place in the 1970s, right before NYC’s massive budget catastrophe. The only portions that were built were four small sections of tunnel.
A two block stretch under Division Street, heading from the Bowery east towards the Manhattan Bridge
Under 2nd Ave from 2nd Street to 9th Street
Under 2nd Ave from 99th Street to 105th Street
Under 2nd Ave from 110th Street to 119th Street.
Exactly how much of each of those excavations was completed and what condition they’re in is not generally known.
There were also some tunnel bellmouths incorporated in the 63rd Street Tunnel for an eventual connection. (You can see them riding the F from Queens).
The current plan for the SAS includes the existing 2nd Ave excavations and the 63rd Street connection, but not the Division Street tunnel.
Spartydog:
The projected cost for the entire project is about $12.6 billion. (So, knowing how public projects go, you can expect it to cost at least $20 billion.) The MTA’s capital programs are expected to pay for half, and the rest from Federal Transportation Equity funding.
Whether any of that money will actually become available is anyone’s guess.