The West 49th Street overpass looms in the background.  One can see how the cut slices through the west side of Manhattan.



Under the 49th Street overpass, a three track configuration is present.  The track located to the right is used as a lay-up track.  The middle track is used as the southbound track, and the left track is used as the northbound track.



Some of the buildings along the cut are built on top of the solid rock that reside underneath the building's foundation.  Vegetation grows on the surface of the rocks during he spring and summer.



The rock makes a nice retaining wall for the cut as the cut approaches another overpass.  One can barley see the snow covered tracks, located adjacent to the rock wall.



At 49th Street, the underpass for the street begins and following that, the ROW passes under several apartment buildings.  The line will continue to go under apartment buildings, then peek through the cut to see daylight, and then pass under more apartment buildings as it makes it's way up the West Side to Riverside Park.  At Riverside Park, the ROW goes in to a tunnel that was built using cut-and-cover engineering methodologies.  Once the ROW makes it's way through Riverside Park and Washington Heights, the ROW emerges to the surface to continue the rest of the journey up Manhattan Island, through the neighborhood of Inwood, across the Harlem River via a swing bridge, and on to the mainland of New York State.  It's truly a fascinating railroad right of way!



My Thoughts about the High Line:

The High Line poses an interesting challenge to Urban Planners, businesses, residents, and special interest groups alike.  There are basically a couple of plans that could determine the fate of the High Line.  Some plans are realistic, and some stem from my imagination.  They are, in no particular rank of importance:

• Raze the High Line
• Leave the High Line as is by making it a landmark
• Leave the High Line alone and let it decay
• Convert the High Line in to a greenway or pedestrian walkway via the rails-to-trails program
• Convert the High Line to a limited access parkway
• Reestablish the High Line as a freight railroad line
• Convert the High Line to a light rail line
• Integrate the High Line in to the New York City Subway system ** My choice! **

    * Pros:

• Could help to spur economic development in the area.
• Land could be used for future residential and commercial buildings.

• Once the viaduct is removed, the ROW would be lost forever.
• Some people are not to keen on having new development in their already crowded neighborhood.

     * Pros:

• A bit of railroad history will be left for future generations of New Yorkers to see.
• Future generations may be able to implement practical uses for this infrastructure.

• The viaduct is extremely expensive to provide maintenance for.  CSX says that it pays over $300,000 a year in maintenance of a structure that just stands there.  City and state taxpayers would have to foot the bill if the government was to take it over.
• If the structure was turned over to the city, the city will lose $100,000 a year in tax revenue that it receives from CSX for property taxes for the viaduct.
• Structure may cost up to $43 million to raze.  Who is going to pay for that?

    * Pros:

• The easiest thing for politicians to do (or so they think).
• The ROW will still be preserved for future generations, until parts of the structure collapses and has to be removed.

• Not a viable solution, as weathering affects will continue to tear away at the steel and concrete that makes up the viaduct.  Someone may get hurt or killed if a big chunks of concrete falls from the viaduct.

    * Pros:

• People would have another vehicle-free ROW, enabling them to enjoy their leisurely activities.
• The environment would benefit from the rails to trails program since there would be very little pollution added to the atmosphere from the people and animals utilizing the greenway.

• Expensive proposition.  Experts predict that it would cost $10 million annually just to maintain the structure after it has been converted to a rails to trails operation.  Who will foot the bill for this?
• How much use will the elevated rails to trails path get?  The newly built bicycle and pedestrian greenway which runs along the Hudson River through Chelsea already serves the same purpose as the High Line trail would.  Would another rail to trail in the vicinity of an existing greenway be popular?

    * Pros:

• In this day and age, it will never happen, so this is not a real option.  But, if Robert Moses was still New York City's arterial coordinator, it might have been considered an option!  Role-playing for a moment, let's pretend that New York City was highway friendly again.  The High Line could be converted to a two-lane in each direction limited access parkway for non-commercial vehicles only.  The only entrances to the highway would be two long feeder ramps: one from West Street to Gansevoort Street and one ramp from 12th Avenue at 34th Street.   The parkway would be an express road for north/south travel through Chelsea.
• Traveling time trough Chelsea would be shortened, providing that the parkway didn't experience traffic congestion.

• Environmentalists and community groups would be up in arms about all of the noise and pollution that would be generated from such a roadway.
• "New roads cause more people to drive", so say the anti-road group.  Manhattan certainly does not need extra cars on the island.
• Mass transit projects are more favorable than highway projects in New York City.  Funding would go to a High Line related mass transit project before it would ever go to a highway project.

    * Pros:

• New York City sorely lacks freight railroad activity for the transportation of goods.  A railroad freight line would ease the amount of trucks that go in and out of the city every day for their deliveries and pickups.
• Freight trains are more environment friendly then trucks are, and pollution levels will be reduced with the use of freight trains.

• The majority of businesses in New York City, especially business in Manhattan, have been conditioned to use trucks as their primary means of delivering and shipping freight.  It may be too late to convince businesses to rely on the railroad for freight deliveries.
• Logistically speaking, many businesses are nowhere near the High Line's ROW.  Freight operations along the High Line would only serve the existing businesses that still have a presence along the ROW.
• Most of the factories that line the High Line ROW have been converted in to residential dwellings.  There is not enough demand along the High Lines ROW for freight operations any longer.  Chelsea is a much different place than it was seventy years ago, when the High Line was constructed.

    * Pros:

• Light rail is supposedly the wave of the future.  New York City can demonstrate that it can ride the wave with the best of them!

• Light Rail does not integrate too well with existing mass transit infrastructure.  The High Line light rail system would be a system into itself - and is not the type of system that government should be looking to build.
• If the time came where integration with the current subway infrastructure was necessary, conversion of either system to make a uniform system would be an extremely expensive undertaking.

    * Pros:

• A subway line for the far west side of Chelsea would be a great thing, in my opinion!
• The new subway line would help ease straphanger congestion on the current IRT 1 and 9 trains
• Any improvement and additional capacity for the existing subway infrastructure is a good thing.  The new subway line could be tunneled to connect to either the IRT line at Christopher Street or the IND line at West 4th Street.  The subway line could run up the High Line to the Javits Center, and make a connection with the IRT 7 line at 42nd Street station via a new subway tunnel from 42nd Street Station to the Javits Center.  New subway stations at Gansevoort Street, West 14th Street, West 23rd Street, West 30th Street and 10th Avenue (via a realignment of the main High Line to connect to the spur at the post office), a stop at the Javits Center, and a stop at 42nd Street station would make a great route!
• Electric subway trains are environment-friendly!
• Subway trains can transport a lot more people than individual cars can.

• Talk about spending money!!  This plan would cost probably as much as the proposed 2nd Avenue subway!
• Would Chelsea residents want to have subway trains streaming past their windows day in and day out?  Elevated subway lines, whether new or refurbished lines made from old viaducts like the High Line, just isn't an alternative any longer in Manhattan.  The city tore-down several elevated lines, including the 3rd and 9th Avenue lines that once graced Manhattan, many years ago.  Planners are not about to build new elevated subway lines anytime soon.  One can only hope that they change their stance on this so that they could use the High Line for such an effort.
• The existing High Line viaduct would have to be considerably refurbished in order to support the new subway system.  Construction of the project could drive local residents crazy.

Epilogue:

Thanks for taking the virtual tour of the High Line on OldNYC.com!  I hope you enjoyed your journey.  Check back at OldNYC.com from time to time to participate in new virtual tours, and view updated commentary and pictures of OldNYC.com's current virtual tours.

References and Links:

Read about The Henry Hudson Parkway and the West Side Improvement project, as well as the Westside Highway and Westway Expressway on Steve Anderson's excellent nycroads.com web site.

The Village Voice article, One Track Mind, Chelsea Group Wants to Save an Abandoned Rail Line, by J.A. Lobbia, January 2nd, Towers & Tenements Section, is available on the web.

The New York Times, Which Track for the High Line?, by David W. Dunlap, December 31, Real Estate Section.
 

<<-- Click Here to go Back to OldNYC.COM Home