|
|
| Water St Subway instead of FTC and SF rebuild? (was:Re: Would 4-track express service...) (486525) | |||
 |
|||
| Home > SubChat | |||
|
[ Read Responses | Post a New Response | Return to the Index ] |
|
||
|
Water St Subway instead of FTC and SF rebuild? (was:Re: Would 4-track express service...) |
|
|
Posted by WillD on Thu Sep 6 10:22:03 2007, in response to Re: Would 4-track express service be of any benefit for Northern Manhattan lines (1, A)?, posted by RonInBayside on Thu Sep 6 08:43:38 2007. Why? The MTA's numbers justifying the South Ferry project have been questionable at best from the get-go. The comments for their EIS were clearly cherrypicked and filtered, so why should anyone listen to their assertions. I feel bad for the passengers and operators who will be stuck in this new conga-line, and the planners who will have to work around MTA Cap Construction's boneheaded decision.Yuri had an interesting idea that the MTA should have pursued the construction of the Water St Subway instead of squandering money on rebuilds of perfectly adaquate stations and glass eggs. Between the 400 million wasted to reduce capacity on the Broadway Local, and the 880 million spent on Kalikow's land deal there's plenty of money to build the 1.5 mile tunnel from Grand St on the MannyB northside access tracks to Hannover Square via the proposed SAS 'Shallow Chrystie' alignment. That way for the 1.3 billion Dubya-Fun-Bucks that are going to FTC and South Ferry, neither of which does anything to add to the subway, the MTA would instead gain about a quarter the full SAS length, place a subway convenient to the Front and South Street office buildings as well as the South St Seaport, and gain a very compelling argument for completing the SAS between 72nd and Grand St on a faster timetable than we're likely to see. Instead we got two rebuilds, neither of which is likely to do much but please a small number of foamers and politicos. Have fun with your pittance and just imagine what you could have had if Kalikow weren't in it for his own profit, you might have been riding a section of the SAS by 2010. |
|
|
|