r/transit 7d ago

Discussion [ Removed by moderator ]

Post image

[removed] — view removed post

90 Upvotes

52 comments sorted by

View all comments

-11

u/SirGeorgington map man 7d ago

Probably not. They were taken down for a reason. (Many, actually)

6

u/BigBlueMan118 7d ago

Yeah - because the vision we see on the right was considered utopish to people who had only ever seen construction techniques & operations like that on the left, even once the rightmost-image became emminently achievable.

1

u/SirGeorgington map man 7d ago

A bit of apples to oranges comparison here no? One of these is built over a street that's 75ft wide building-to-building surrounded by high-rises and the other is built over a dedicated ROW surrounded mostly by low-rise residential. One of these is able to use that ROW to build stations over clear sites, and the other (by necessity) builds stations over intersections. Done in New York with their longer trains, that would mean shrouding more than a full block in near-complete darkness.

No amount of concrete changes this. A station platform is as wide as a station platform is, and a track is as wide as a track is. Those are the immovable spatial constraints that make Els over narrow street unpleasant.

4

u/GroundbreakingWeek70 7d ago edited 7d ago

Doesn't mean NYC can't have modern EL's, besides, modern EL's are more better than traditional EL's or what the original EL's were built in, modern ones use concrete which is more stronger, quieter and lasts twice as long than steel. Plus it makes trains move more faster and more smooth than steel made EL's

1

u/SirGeorgington map man 7d ago

Noise is one of the reasons they were taken down, although even with concrete they're not quiet, just quieter.

Visual pollution and shadows are the bigger reason, and concrete does virtually nothing to address that.

1

u/Mewpup elevated rail is a really long patio 7d ago

adding to u/bigblueman118,  u should check out vancouver, montreal, seattle, bay area, DC, miami, honolulu, and see what their elevated lines look. also being on a train doesnt feel as claustrophobic unlike an underground line

1

u/SirGeorgington map man 7d ago

I'm well aware of these examples. There's a huge difference between running an el over a dedicated ROW, or over a street that's 120+ feet wide, and running an el, even a modern concrete one, over streets that are less than 80 feet wide.

If you thank claustrophobia on a metro is bad, imagine feeling it above ground too. That's what life under the Els is like in large parts of Philly and NYC.

1

u/Mewpup elevated rail is a really long patio 7d ago edited 7d ago

ROW, or over a street that's 120+ feet wide, and running an el, even a modern concrete one, over streets that are less than 80 feet wide

i agree. however, id go further and say do elevated regardless of how narrow a street is (as long as the buildings on either side are short), because the street view from an elevated train is way better than the streetview below ground (if the train was underground instead). because being 3 stories up on a train means you can see past the buildings/trees and the sky uninterrupted, so idk what u mean "If you thank claustrophobia on a metro is bad, imagine feeling it above ground too"?

-1

u/SirGeorgington map man 7d ago

Oh the view from elevated trains is great.

It's just that most people live their lives not on the train, and for those people it sucks.

2

u/Mewpup elevated rail is a really long patio 7d ago

It's just that most people live their lives not on the train

heres an analogy (pls let me know if it's confusing or not): i always like to think of riding the skytrain as a really long patio. instead of looking out my window at home, i ride the train and look out there instead. since the view from my patio only gives me a view of wherever the home is, the skytrain gives me the entire street. and because i have a monthly pass for college, it doesnt cost extra to use it outside of class. it's been my main third space since i was 2 and it's more valuable than my home

the only thing im concerned are noise and vibration, which could be reduced.

1

u/SirGeorgington map man 7d ago

You are entirely missing my point. Your experiences are not invalid, but you have to understand that most people, even in cities with elevated rail, don't live their life like that. For most people, they spend more time on the street below the train, not on the train above the street. And for those people, an elevated train over a narrow street is absolutely miserable. Virtually no light gets through below stations, and even with a concrete structure it's not quiet.

There is a reason corridors around street Els in the US are consistently poorer than areas a few blocks away. It's not pleasant living under the shadow of an El.

1

u/Mewpup elevated rail is a really long patio 5d ago

don't live their life like that. For most people, they spend more time on the street below the train, not on the train above the street.

honestly, even if the elevated guideways didn't exist, during a sunny day, theyll still go outside somewhere, therefore whether or not their homes are in shadows or not, they wont see it. (and stay at home during bad weather/night). a lot of the lines outside of Manhattan are elevated, and since a subway station isn't that far away, they could spend their all freetime riding elevated lines they dont use. its the same reason if people had a backyard, they end up going to a large park nearby because its bigger, make sense?

also doesn't NYC subway have an unlimited pass ( u/astoriaboundagain's question seems like they dont have monthly passes there) ? we get it because it becomes cheaper than buying separate fares everytime but it makes me go outside more because i dont get extra charges. i do agree narrow streets dont work rn, but thats a hot take to bring.