Quote:
Originally Posted by JohnIII
I think the old Subway spur went to about South Street; however I think if a spur were built it should be longer; if development takes place along the waterfront you'll have new commuters in high-rises as well as current residential areas and new residents may help justify ridership and fund in time.
|
I still believe that a two-stop spur between South St and 2nd Street is the best solution. If we were to extend the spur along Columbus Blvd to maybe Oregon Ave or the Sports Complex, my only concern would be that we'd hit table water. You have to understand that Center City's elevation is 39 ft, meaning that if each stop were to have a mezzanine and a platform below it, it would be a lot tougher to maintain that tunnel.
There's really no subway line in NYC that runs parallel to the East or Hudson Rivers. Only lines I can think of that's the closest are the Eighth Avenue and the Second Ave lines. Just about almost every subway line in NYC doesn't really run parallel to the rivers but they do intersect them to cross over to the next borough.
The closest line that's close to Chicago's Lakefront is the Shore Line East, which is practically below grade in Chicago's Loop through the South Side to IN. Boston and DC has lines that only cross their water routes and the Bay Areas one tunnel which crosses the SF Bay (and another planned on it's way).
I've said this thousands of times, but the city would've had a much better subway system had the powers that be understood that having an expansive subway system like NYC, Chicago, and Boston was the way to go rather than relying on just two subway lines. It makes a lot of sense converting the Chestnut Hill and Norristown Lines into the subway system and expanding and creating more heavy rail lines along the NE and SW into Bensalem and Chester would've been perfect.
Quote:
Originally Posted by JohnIII
The consideration os trolleys on Delaware was done before and an elevated Subway is a thought; the only problem with trolleys is that they are at the mercy of automobile traffic at the cross streets and while it is cheaper the width of Delaware Avenue is to be considered; how do pedestrians access it easily through the traffic without hazard. Washington Avenue and Delaware Avenue aren't like Baltimore Avenue in that Baltimore Avenue is not a multi-lane road and the former is. While a Subway is more expensive it does have safety issues already addressed by pedestrian crossing over the roadway or below.
Yet to stay on topic all I can think of it development of skyscrapers because that will justify any mass transit construction.
|
Delaware Ave is a multilane highway which serves the Port of Philadelphia as well as the numerous shopping centers that line it while Washington Ave had train tracks along it's median. It's better to just expand our current light rail (subway-surface) system in West and Southwest Philadelphia and restore the old 23 line from South Philly to Chestnut Hill.
A subway is much better for long term development than just expanding the light rail system along Delaware and Washington Ave. It still bugs me the city didn't build a more expansive subway system when the city boomed from early 20th century until 1950.