
Inside An Illegal Party In An Abandoned Subway Station Deep Under NYC - vxNsr
http://gothamist.com/2013/06/24/photos_illegal_party_in_an_abandone.php#photo-19
======
apawloski
"I walked away without looking back, feeling like we'd just gotten away with
an elaborate bank robbery."

I used to run treasure hunts, along with a friend of mine, where teams of four
would solve puzzles and clues that would take them through a series of
locations similar to the one in the article [1]. This is a really good way to
describe the feeling -- I've always described it as "playing secret agent."

Incidentally though, we were always terrified to bring even small groups of
people into these various abandoned buildings. I still have nightmares about
it. Having a party -- with that many people and that much noise -- is
absolutely insane.

[1] Some examples I dug up:
[http://imgur.com/a/WVw4Q](http://imgur.com/a/WVw4Q)

~~~
nostromo
Tangent: There's a guy that's been climbing public spaces lately, including
the Golden Gate Bridge and the Space Needle. The photos are absolutely
stunning.

[http://www.nopromiseofsafety.com/?p=1680](http://www.nopromiseofsafety.com/?p=1680)

[http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2336093/Mysterious-u...](http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2336093/Mysterious-
urban-explorer-jaw-dropping-pictures-prove-feats-comes-forward.html)

~~~
iharris
Related: There's a fellow named Bradley Garrett who did his PhD dissertation
on "Place Hacking". GQ has an awesome article of the crazy places he has
explored and his run-ins with law enforcement when "hacking" certain
restricted locations.

[http://www.gq.com/news-politics/newsmakers/201303/urban-
expl...](http://www.gq.com/news-politics/newsmakers/201303/urban-explorers-gq-
march-2013)

~~~
andyjohnson0
Abstract of _Place Hacking: Tales of Urban Exploration_ , doctoral thesis by
Bradley Garrett [1]. Includes download link (slow) for the full document.

[1] [http://pure.rhul.ac.uk/portal/en/publications/place-
hacking-...](http://pure.rhul.ac.uk/portal/en/publications/place-hacking-
tales-of-urban-exploration\(f797c2ec-0c78-4a48-a741-ee6015effab6\).html)

------
ChuckMcM
Somebody has been reading "Pirate Cinema" (or perhaps Cory was just retelling
this story in a fictional setting).

I tried for a while to generate interest in a 'no code' sort of limited
liability contract which was literally signed with a drop of blood which said
"No one is liable for anything that happens to me at this event" that was
enforceable in court. Building collapses and 500 die? Oh well. Someone goes
ape shit on acid and shoots people, tough. You slipped on some vomit and broke
two vertebrae and now cant walk, sucks to be you dude.

The interesting bit for me has always been the contrast between people
demanding that they should be allowed to throw parties like this, but then are
unwilling to make themselves and no one else solely responsible for what
happens.

Of all the things Cory did explore in his excellent book (mostly a screed on
big content types) I wish he had tackled that one too.

~~~
bigiain
The Burningman ticket has for as long as I remember (at least as far back as
'98) had words similar to "I voluntarily assume the risk of serious injury or
death by attending this event".

(We had tshirts made with the exact ticket wording in '01 or '02...)

~~~
gaius
Right, but that is just hipster douchebags thinking it would be "edgy" to say
that. One sniff of actual danger and they'll have Daddy come pick them up, or
buy their way out with his credit card.

~~~
aeontech
There are certainly art installations every year that can maim or kill if you
do something stupid. For that matter if you're stupid and wander off into the
dust storm without water, you can easily get heat stroke. That doesn't mean
going to burning man is "edgy and dangerous", it just means that's what you
have to put on a ticket if you are organizing an event in litigation-happy
USA.

~~~
gaius
Funny that the UK has all the ambulance-chasing lawyers too now (thanks
America!) yet there is no such disclaimer on Glastonbury.

~~~
andyking
There's a big fence around Glastonbury - and wandering off into the Somerset
countryside doesn't hold the same level of risk as walking out into the
desert...

~~~
bigiain
And while never having been to Glastonbury, I strongly doubt I'd have the
opportunity there to get as close to the action with things like Greg Leyh's
30foot tall Tesla Coil(1), or Jim Masons flamethrowers(2), or Dance Dance
Immolation(3), or even the somewhat more "safe" artworks like Crude
Awakening(4).

I know Burningman has a _very_ strong "hipster douchbag" reputation these days
(and I won't argue that it's not at least somewhat deserved) - there is
definitely something more than that as well.

(1)
[http://galleries.burningman.com/photos/klammerd/klammerd.995...](http://galleries.burningman.com/photos/klammerd/klammerd.9955)

(2)
[http://galleries.burningman.com/photos/silver/silver.3577](http://galleries.burningman.com/photos/silver/silver.3577)

(3)
[http://galleries.burningman.com/photos/mr_fang/mr_fang.21326](http://galleries.burningman.com/photos/mr_fang/mr_fang.21326)

(4) [http://youtu.be/EWGx0PhDGlU?t=2m44s](http://youtu.be/EWGx0PhDGlU?t=2m44s)

~~~
katem
DDI is pretty safe, Flame Thrower Shooting Gallery is the one I worry about.
BTW we're bringing both of them back (and more) this year as part of Charcade:
[http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/Site3/charcade-
burning-m...](http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/Site3/charcade-burning-
man-2013)

------
foobarbazqux
That looks like a fun party. It makes me happy that this kind of thing
happens. There's something really exciting about dancing in abandoned spaces.
It's as if they've been returned to nature, and the party goers belong to a
primitive tribe involved in some ancient ritual. I know that sounds cheesy but
I don't know how else to describe the experience.

For contrast, I believe that the same event organized in cooperation with the
city in a functioning subway station wouldn't be nearly as fun. Perhaps it's
the feeling of peaceful anarchy that's most important.

Many parties that take place in abandoned warehouses have a similar vibe -
most western nations have cracked down on them on the basis of unregulated
drug and alcohol use - although this location is really quite dramatic and I
bet the musicians were amazing. I wish there was an mp3.

------
saalweachter
> "How do I get out?" she nervously asked. I followed her back up to the
> hatch, where some Agents did their best to calm her down, but firmly
> reminded her that no one would be allowed to leave until the end. She seemed
> a little upset, but I saw her later and it seemed that she'd happily
> embraced the Stockholm syndrome.

I don't mind the trespassing so much, but activities without safe words aren't
cool.

~~~
bigiain
Ummmm, maybe.

What's the "safe word" for an long (think international) flight? What's the
safe word for a deep-enough-to-require-decompression scuba dive? What's the
safe word for a roller coaster? A parachute jump? There are lots of things
which, once embarked upon don't have any "easy" ways out apart from seeing
them through to the end.

From TFA "To remind you, this is an event with some legal and physical risks.
If you are uncomfortable with these risks you should not attend. Really. Once
the event begins you cannot leave for two hours."

They made it clear enough - in my opinion. If you're the sort of person who
needs a safe word for all your activities, you shouldn't attend that sort of
event (or do any of many things which are hard or impossible to "back out of"
once started).

~~~
saalweachter
Fair point; there are some activities that it is simple not feasible to
terminate at a moment's notice. But this wasn't one of them: standing between
the woman and the end of a claustrophobia-induced panic attack wasn't the laws
of nature but two goons scared of the legal consequences of their actions.
Helluva difference.

And remember, even if the woman knew in advance she was at least somewhat
claustrophobic, the exact nature of the physical and legal risks were unknown:
maybe the woman would have been fine if they had been climbing up ladders onto
an abandoned rooftop instead of down ladders into an abandoned subway.

~~~
bigiain
While you (and anigbrowl below) are both right - in that my counter examples
all involve some sort of physical inevitability of the "lock in" \- I'm not
sure that's necessarily a hard requirement to enforce this kind of lock in.
From the "real world" there's things like journalist lock ins at political
events which're much the same - a voluntarily agreed upon limitation that's
not enforced by the fact that you just stepped out of a plane or descended 120
feet under the sea, but which are no less "enforced".

I'm of the opinion that an event organiser is perfectly entitled to put these
sorts of restrictions on participants ability to exit an event (within some
reasonable bounds), and so long as it's clearly enough explained before
participants agree and attend, a "claustrophobia-induced panic attack" should
be no more or less of a concern for event staff than it'd be on an
international flight. The sufferer should be extended all sympathy and
assistance - but the decision to "break the agreement" should be of the same
sort of level as diverting a Sydney to San Francisco flight to Hawaii, sure
you'd do it in the face of a clear and imminent medical emergency - but
there's a certain (and perhaps large) level of discomfort which passengers are
rightfully expected to "put up with" as part of the agreement. People who're
"afraid of flying" and prone to panic attacks understand that, and make
appropriate decisions (for them) all the time. From the article's "and it
seemed that she'd happily embraced the Stockholm syndrome." it sounds to me
like she accepted "the rules/agreement" in the end, while perhaps regretting
the choice was in this case incorrect for her - the very negative use of the
phrase "Stockholm syndrome" implies to me that she thinks the event organisers
and the "two goons" did the right thing.

I'm sure other people think differently - and while I respect that different
opinion - I'm not sure I agree that every event ever organised needs to cater
to every possible latent bad reaction. _I_ want to be able to attend events
that challenge my personal limits of comfort/security/sanity/whatever. I'm
happy enough for those things to have clearly and strongly worded warnings -
but I'm unhappy with someone saying "that's not a restriction imposed by a law
of nature, so you can't impose it as a requirement of an event you run".

~~~
mapt
Trapping a person inside a building by force, when otherwise they would be
physically capable of leaving, on the other hand, could easily be construed as
criminal kidnapping. In this case, kidnapping in order to obstruct justice may
even be arguable.

~~~
bigiain
Sure. I'm not arguing against "it could easily be construed" and "it may even
be arguable" (though I think you're seriously stretching there). If this was a
regular nightclub with no prior agreement/requirement about exit policy, you'd
be completely unarguably right.

My questions are: Are there circumstances in which it would be considered
appropriate? And what sort of notification do you have to give in advance
before it could be widely considered appropriate?

Where I come from, the government considers it appropriate to "lock up"
journalists for 6hrs on a voluntary basis in return for privileged early
access to information about the federal budget:
[http://ministers.treasury.gov.au/DisplayDocs.aspx?doc=pressr...](http://ministers.treasury.gov.au/DisplayDocs.aspx?doc=pressreleases/2012/018.htm&pageID=003&min=wms&Year=2012&doctype=0)
I'm not sure how the exemption for "except in case of emergency" is applied,
but I reasonably sure it's closer to the "OK, divert the flight from San
Francisco to Honolulu" grade "emergencies" rather than claustrophobia or panic
attacks.

If I, as a competent adult of sound mind, wish to _choose_ to put myself in a
situation where someone will "trap me inside a building by force, when
otherwise I would be physically capable of leaving" \- what steps does an
event organiser have to go to to not be accused of wrongdoing when they do
exactly that?

While I'm happy enough that I'd agree to be "bound" by an event invitation
instruction saying "To remind you, this is an event with some legal and
physical risks. If you are uncomfortable with these risks you should not
attend. Really. Once the event begins you cannot leave for two hours." \- I
can understand that some people might think that's not "enough".

If there are any people reading who disagree that statement is sufficient to
justify the actions on the part of the event staff in the article - what would
you consider "sufficient notification/agreement"? (Or do you think restricting
my ability to choose to be able to go to that sort of event is "right"?)

~~~
FireBeyond
> "it may even be arguable" (though I think you're seriously stretching there)

He's not stretching - it's one of the very textbook definitions of kidnapping,
forcibly preventing someone from leaving a situation. Put it this way, if I,
as a paramedic, am on scene of someone who has a medical need, but is of sound
mind, if they say "no, I want to get out of this ambulance" \- even if we are
going lights and sirens to the hospital - for me to refuse leads me to charges
of assault, kidnapping, and malpractice.

~~~
bigiain
FWIW, my "it may even be arguable" objection was to the specific "on order to
obstruct justice" part of this claim: "In this case, kidnapping in order to
obstruct justice may even be arguable."

In _my_ opinion, anybody who argues they've been "kidnapped" if being told
they can't leave an event which advertised itself saying "once the event
starts you won't be able to leave for two hours" is most likely being
unspeakably self centered and disrespectful of everybody else's time and
rights. Sure, there are exceptions - and if event staff _really_ tried to
enforce the agreed-upon no-exit policy in the face of medical emergency or
obvious external need, perhaps "kidnapping" would be the right (or one of the
useable) legal remedies, but going down that path for claustrophobia or panic
attacks will result in me judging you in a _very_ unfavourable light - in much
the same way as I'd be extremely unhappy to have my flight diverted for a
panic attack.

In your professional/ambulance case, there's at least one big difference -
people don't specifically get asked to agree up front that once they get in
the ambulance the deal is they agree not to get out until the end of the ride.
And I've got a question - where does practical reality come into conflict with
your risk of getting charged? If I demanded to get out of your ambulance
immediately, whould you stop and let me out in the middle of the Golden Gate
Bridge or the Lincoln Tunnel?

~~~
mapt
You are talking about matters of etiquette & consent. Consent can be granted,
but it can also be revoked. The woman in question apparently ceased her
attempts to leave when presented with two bouncers who intimidated her in some
way. This in itself may be, in American legal parlance, 'assault', the threat
of force, used instrumentally in order to accomplish kidnapping. But it begs
another question: What _exactly_ would have occurred if the woman had not
taken 'no' for an answer? The men were there to tell her not to leave. The men
were chosen for their physical characteristics that conveyed an implicit
message of 'we are able to restrain you if we have to'.

------
jliechti1
This reminds of the secret night club in an abandoned water tower (also in
NYC) from last month, albeit larger in scale.

article: [http://www.nytimes.com/2013/05/23/nyregion/illicit-
nightclub...](http://www.nytimes.com/2013/05/23/nyregion/illicit-nightclub-in-
a-chelsea-water-tower.html)

photos:
[http://www.nytimes.com/slideshow/2013/05/22/nyregion/2013052...](http://www.nytimes.com/slideshow/2013/05/22/nyregion/20130522_SPEAKEASY.html?ref=nyregion#1)

------
untog
In case any New Yorkers are wondering, the party was held between Pell and
Canal St, in a section of the subway that was created for the Second Ave
Subway in the 70s, but will not be used in the one being built now (so, will
likely never be used). And this is not confidential information:

[http://secondavenuesagas.com/2013/06/25/abandoned-sas-
segmen...](http://secondavenuesagas.com/2013/06/25/abandoned-sas-segment-
party-prompts-nypd-inquiry/)

~~~
daegloe
If you remain on the downtown 6 train after the last stop (Brooklyn Bridge-
City Hall), you get a glimpse of the abandoned City Hall station [1] as the
train turns around. This was one of the very first NYC subway stations to open
in 1904!

It's a beautiful piece of history. [2]

[1]
[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/City_Hall_(IRT_Lexington_Avenue...](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/City_Hall_\(IRT_Lexington_Avenue_Line\))

[2]
[http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vWF3IDk9Gek](http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vWF3IDk9Gek)

------
ChrisNorstrom
It's sad that this is illegal. They're not doing anything wrong and it's their
tax payer dollars that built those tunnels anyway. The depths of New York
belong to the people.

"But it's not safe". What is? In the USA 40,000 die each year from car
accidents, 700+ children from drowning, 1 million+ from cancer and heart
disease. If going down there wasn't illegal they'd be able to have lighting,
security, and other safety measures to make it even more safe.

(btw, this is totally the type of place that Stefon would suggest on SNL)

~~~
lmm
False dichotomy. Life isn't and can't be completely safe. But abandoned
structures are considerably more dangerous than much of life (with the
exception of car travel, which there's a cultural bias that leads people to
ignore the risks of. Frankly you have to be crazy to get in a car in this day
and age, but that's another argument). Building codes and fire escape
requirements exist for a reason; sooner or later a lot of people will die at
an event much like this one. It's unfortunate that there's no way to legally
accept the risks of something dangerous, but it would be very difficult to
make such a thing legally rigorous (if you can come up with a good proposal it
will have my support).

~~~
wffurr
You don't even have to be in the car. You have to be crazy to even go near a
street.

[http://bigstory.ap.org/article/8-hurt-some-seriously-when-
ca...](http://bigstory.ap.org/article/8-hurt-some-seriously-when-car-jumps-
curb-nyc)

------
ics
For those curious, the newsletter this was announced on is Nonsense NYC
([http://www.nonsensenyc.com/](http://www.nonsensenyc.com/)). I've been
unsubscribed for the last year or two, but in years prior there have been many
very interesting items every single week. Everything from knitting to robots
(battlebots!) to things like this and more.

------
mehmehshoe
When I was a youngin, we took to the woods outside of town with generators,
kegs and a couple of live bands. It certainly wasn't as hip as this party but
when you get sick of getting busted in the city, you get creative. We hung
lights in the trees and constructed stages for the bands.

Now I am 40... You kids need to get off my lawn!

~~~
pavel_lishin
I had this exact same thought the other day, walking past groups of people
sitting on the stoop, playing music out of their cars. It looked _exactly_
like a field party, except it was in Manhattan.

------
jborden13
Reminds me of the parties thrown in the catacombs under Paris. Always wanted
to do it.

[http://www.cnn.com/2012/08/02/world/europe/wus-france-
cataco...](http://www.cnn.com/2012/08/02/world/europe/wus-france-catacombs-
explorer)

------
gailees
It makes me so happy that this type of thing actually happens in the world.

------
afarrell
Interesting how all of these folks are cool with someone taking photos of them
and posting them to the internet, particularly since the site states that the
party is illegal.

~~~
jrockway
It's very unlikely that the state wants to pursue a trespassing charge based
on a poorly-lit photograph. "Do you have any physical evidence that this is my
client?" "No." "I rest my case."

~~~
RockyMcNuts
well, they might want to put a stop to it before there's a fire or stampede in
a tight space with no exits. these folks seem pretty well organized but
they're also locking people in. if there's an incident, guaranteed the city
gets sued for big bucks if it it's on their property.

~~~
jrockway
I doubt the city would be sued for this.

~~~
RockyMcNuts
young padawan, much to learn, you have, about the ways of the dark side. when
you look at the dark side, careful you must be. For the dark side looks back.

[http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/08/22/lawsuits-cost-
new-y...](http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/08/22/lawsuits-cost-new-york-
ci_n_932962.html)

~~~
jrockway
Those sound pretty reasonable to me -- if you get hit by a car, you should sue
the driver, even if the driver is the NYPD. That's a far cry from going down
into the second avenue subway and suing the city for slipping and falling.

(Remember, being an invitee is different from being a trespassee. If you hurt
yourself in a normal subway station, that's one thing. But if you open a
manhole and crawl down into an abandoned station, that's another thing.)

~~~
RockyMcNuts
from TFA

    
    
      A Manhattan jury awarded $14.1 million to a woman who lay
      down on New York City subway tracks and was hit by a train 
      during a failed suicide. Another New York City jury gave 
      $9.3 million to a man who fell on subway tracks while 
      inebriated and lost his left arm. Another drunk on the 
      tracks was awarded $6 million.
    

I dunno, if you can get $14.1m for lying down on the subway tracks, you can
probably get a pot of money if the city turns a blind eye while people go down
into unlocked vaults for parties and have an accident.

~~~
jrockway
That's pretty dumb. But perhaps it's subtle encouragement from the juries for
the MTA to install platform doors:

[http://funini.com/train/tokyo/namboku/00.html](http://funini.com/train/tokyo/namboku/00.html)

------
laumars
This reminds me of some of the squat parties[1] that would happen in the UK
(and particularly around London) in the 80s and 90s.

[1]
[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_party#Squat_Party](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_party#Squat_Party)

~~~
versk
Still happening, except they wouldn't last 2 hours like OP's story. I took an
american colleague to a rave (in dublin) about a year ago and he was freaking
out at the fact that you had to meet someone somewhere then get passed off to
a few more people before you got there. "Its like the movies man!"

Then we raved until 9 in the morning to some deep techno. There were no
official photographers.

I honestly thought NY would have a majorly active underground party scene.

~~~
laumars
_> Still happening_

Not as much though. The police basically killed it completely come the
beginning of the 00s. (though there's a chance that I'm now just completely
out of the loop so oblivious to it all)

~~~
scrumper
Ah yes, the Criminal Justice Act. I think the law even has provisions about
"repetitive beats." I seem to remember vaguely a techno track at the time that
sampled some politician (Michael Howard, I think, the Home Secretary) reading
that part of the bill. Memory is obviously a bit hazy.

There are still raves in fields, but nothing like to the extent there used to
be.

------
zkirill
What are some potential reasons for a subway station to become abandoned?

It looks like the construction had advanced quite far before it was halted.

~~~
RockyMcNuts
Here's one - got reused as a museum. honestly just seems like poor planning,
they ended up not having so many local trains they needed a separate terminus.

[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_York_Transit_Museum#Station...](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_York_Transit_Museum#Station_history)

sometimes when the system gets extended, sections become redundant.

when they built the new South Ferry station they abandoned the old one. then
when the new station got destroyed by Sandy they went back to the old one,
which is so small everyone has to exit through the first 5 cars.

[http://www.nydailynews.com/new-york/south-ferry-subway-
stati...](http://www.nydailynews.com/new-york/south-ferry-subway-station-
reopens-public-sandy-damage-article-1.1307488)

------
contacternst
In the comments section, the author explains that he shut down comments by
others due to them exposing the location of the event. The responsible thing
to do would be to take the blog post down. I'd be very surprised if he got an
invite to the next event at this rate...

~~~
zeckalpha
The photographers were professional hired photographers for the event. The
author was asked to cover the event.

~~~
contacternst
The point is that this "professional" photographer doesn't seem to be acting
as professional as this kind of event calls for.

------
littletables
Yay, it's the Extra Action Marching Band - the dancers, drummers and horn
players in the photos! (They evolved out of Crash Worship.)

~~~
100k
Extra Action invaded RailsConf 2007 in Portland, leading to one of the most
memorable shows I've ever been to.

My friend says the Rails community bifurcated at that moment, split between
those who thought it was awesome, and those who thought it was disruptive and
unprofessional.

------
tn13
Why was the party illegal ?

~~~
anigbrowl
you're supposed to get a permit for events over 50 people, and you're supposed
to have separate permits to the publicly-owned venue, there are supposed to be
bathrooms, proper fire escapes, yadda yadda. And in fairness, these
requirements exist for good reasons, because for every artsy type that runs
such an event in a reasonable responsible fashion, there's a greedy promoter
that will do the same sort of thing for purely mercenary purposes and who is
willing to sacrifice the safety of the guests on the altar of profit.

~~~
Gormo
> you're supposed to get a permit for events over 50 people

That sounds unconstitutional.

~~~
foobarbazqux
In the UK you cannot have unpermitted gatherings on your own property where
the music being played "includes sounds wholly or predominantly characterised
by the emission of a succession of repetitive beats."

~~~
graue
I wonder if that law was part of the inspiration for breakcore? You'd be safe
if the beats aren't actually repeating...

~~~
foobarbazqux
It's not breakcore, but Autechre's Anti EP was released in protest.

[http://www.discogs.com/Autechre-Anti-
EP/release/157](http://www.discogs.com/Autechre-Anti-EP/release/157)

I like the way they also printed some of the sticker notes on the actual
labels. You can see this if you click on the teal sleeve image at the top
left.

------
svantana
I have attended events like this a few times in the Stockholm area, and
although quality varies, I generally love it. I wish there was an easier way
to organize and invite people to these types of events - maybe a kickstarter-
like website? The tricky part is keeping authorities oblivious...

------
abalone
Extra Action "crashed" a wedding I was at once. Everybody ended up in the pool
(there was a pool). It was awesome. They had to drain the pool the next day.

This one's a little too contrived and self-congratulatory for my tastes,
though.

------
Wintamute
A few too many brass instruments and costumed performers to be totally
compatible with my idea of an illegal rave, but the venue looks fun!

~~~
lmm
An illegal rave, like anything else, needs a lot of planning and organization
to make it any good. The reality is that most things like this are set up by
rich people with artistic pretensions (and often parents with connections in
city hall), because they're the ones who can afford to take the risk.

If you go to one that wasn't set up by rich people you get a much more low-key
affair; if it's not marketed well enough it can easily degenerate into a
handful of people drinking in the dark in an empty building. Which is fun in
its own way (but wouldn't lend itself to bloggable photos).

~~~
benjaminlhaas
I know some of the people involved in this affair, and I can assure you that
they are far from rich or connected. The fact is, NYC has a vibrant,
organized, motivated underground arts culture and community.

------
jrockway
So where was this? The author claims it's in DUMBO, but I don't know of any
abandoned subway stations there.

~~~
gaadd33
Chinatown area, the article says they walked for a bit from DUMBO which would
make sense to cross the bridge.
[http://secondavenuesagas.com/2013/06/25/abandoned-sas-
segmen...](http://secondavenuesagas.com/2013/06/25/abandoned-sas-segment-
party-prompts-nypd-inquiry/)

