Railway Station Historical Society Railfan.net E-Mail List Photo Archive
H_M1946.jpg Original: 636 by 666 pixels - Current: 636 by 666 - 100%
Try your mouse wheel too!
From: "Paul S DOT Luchter" luckyshow AT mindspring DOT com
Date: Tue, 13 Nov 2001 22:56:16 -0500
Subject: Re: (rshsdepot) [oops!] NYTimes: From 70's Relic, a Possible PATH Station
"H_M1946.jpg" - image/jpeg, 229867 bytes, 636x666 (224kb)
Well, that was pretty stupid wasn't it-here is the photo from the article on
bringing Church Street Station back to life....so what was going on that May
From: Steven Delibert To: firstname.lastname@example.org Date: Tuesday, November 13, 2001 10:08 AM
Subject: (rshsdepot) NYTimes: From 70's Relic, a Possible PATH Station
>November 13, 2001
>THE HUDSON TUBE
>From 70's Relic, a Possible PATH Station
>By JAMES GLANZ
>The old Hudson and Manhattan Railroad station on the eastern edge of the
>World Trade Center site, closed since the early 1970's, could be restored
>and reopened as a permanent replacement for the PATH station that was
>crushed in the collapse of the trade towers, an official at the Port
>Authority of New York and New Jersey said yesterday.
>The plan, which could cost $1.5 billion, is one of several PATH
>under consideration. It would take four to five years and would involve a
>temporary reopening of the damaged station in perhaps two years, said the
>official, Raymond E. Sandiford, the Port Authority's chief geotechnical
>engineer, who spoke yesterday at a forum on the disaster at Columbia
>Moving the permanent station to the old Hudson and Manhattan stop - just
>west of Church Street, and east of the damaged station - would let the Port
>Authority finish the project without interfering in any private developer's
>work to raise new buildings at the heart of the trade center site, Mr.
>"We could do all our work there, where it's clear of what he's doing," Mr.
>Yesterday's forum, sponsored by the School of Engineering and Applied
>Science at Columbia, also offered fresh details on the causes and technical
>implications of the collapse of the trade towers.
>Both the presentations and the questions from members of the audience, many
>of them engineers, exposed the roiling uncertainty that the collapses have
>produced in the technical community over whether the standards and codes
>that govern building design should be altered to deal with the possibility
>of terrorist attacks.
>The forum's speakers, including many people directly involved in the
>original design of the towers and the cleanup after their collapse, agreed
>that no design could guarantee that a building would survive being struck
>a jetliner laden with fuel. But many said it was inevitable that, in the
>wake of the disaster, codes covering fire resistance, structure and
>emergency escapes for high-rise buildings would be altered.
>"That's going to happen," said Charles Thornton, chairman of
>LZA/Thornton-Tomasetti, an engineering company that is advising the city on
>the cleanup. "You're going to have to change the code."
>Mr. Thornton and other structural engineers said many life-saving changes
>would not necessarily be extremely expensive. He said that simple measures
>like having crossbeams run continuously through a building - rather than
>being jointed, or connected as separate pieces, at each vertical column -
>could help protect against total collapse if one column is knocked out by a
>bomb or another terrorist attack.
>Richard Tomasetti, president of LZA/Thornton-Tomasetti, said some of the
>company's customers were already asking for such measures, even though they
>have not yet been written into building codes and so are not mandatory.
>Ultimately, code changes could go beyond structural issues, said Frank
>Lombardi, the Port Authority's chief engineer. "As a result of the World
>Trade Center, I think you'll see some fire standards be improved," he said.
>Each trade tower survived the initial impact of a jet fully loaded with
>fuel; both collapsed when fires stoked by the fuel softened the steel that
>held up the towers, creating conditions never envisioned in the towers'
>Another outcome of the disaster is likely to be the new PATH station. The
>final plan will be chosen from several alternatives under consideration,
>said Allen Morrison, a Port Authority spokesman.
>"From a policy point of view, there have been absolutely no decisions made
>on the reconstruction of the PATH station," Mr. Morrison said.
>But if engineers can quickly clear debris and secure an underground
>retaining wall at the trade center site - a structure often called the
>bathtub, since it keeps the waters of the Hudson out - then the existing,
>maged PATH station could be reopened about two years from now, Mr. Morrison
>said. New pedestrian entrances could be built near Vesey Street to the
>and Liberty Street on the south.
>In one leading plan, that station would then serve as a stopgap, with few
>pedestrian connections or amenities, and construction began to reopen the
>old Hudson and Manhattan stop, which has remained in a state of ghostly
>abandonment since being closed in 1971. For now the structure consists of
>little more than an empty concrete box that would have to be lengthened so
>as many as 10 cars could stop at the platform at once.
>Some Port Authority engineers favor this plan because it avoids the
>complications that would arise if the damaged PATH station were being fully
>rehabilitated while, in the same area, new buildings were being constructed
>on the World Trade Center site. That would require close choreography of
>workers and heavy equipment on the two projects.
>The new station would eventually have underground pedestrian connections to
>all the other subways in the area, including the N, R, E, C, 1, 9, 4, 5, M
>and J lines.
>Any plan to return the PATH train to service will also involve repairing
>water damage to the system. The train tunnels are still plugged with
>concrete stoppers on the New Jersey side inserted when water was discovered
>to be leaking into the tunnels.