|
|
| Question: Why No Station at 188th Street/Hillside Avenue? (1445944) | |
 |
|
| Home > SubChat | |
[ Post a New Response | Return to the Index ]
|
|
Page 1 of 3 |
|
|
|
| (1445946) | |
Re: Question: Why No Station at 188th Street/Hillside Avenue? |
|
|
Posted by Union Tpke on Tue Aug 8 18:12:21 2017, in response to Question: Why No Station at 188th Street/Hillside Avenue?, posted by Mitch45 on Tue Aug 8 18:02:44 2017. They would also need the tracks to extend to 196th Street for the layup tracks, and then you can say that there should be a stop there, requiring the layup tracks to go even further. |
|
|
| (1445947) | |
Re: Question: Why No Station at 188th Street/Hillside Avenue? |
|
|
Posted by New Flyer #857 on Tue Aug 8 18:17:49 2017, in response to Question: Why No Station at 188th Street/Hillside Avenue?, posted by Mitch45 on Tue Aug 8 18:02:44 2017. The station opened in 1950 I believe, so the decision-making was occurring in the 1940s. And of course the planning is not necessarily for it to have been a permanent dead-end.I'm not sure what the bus route history is that far back. But here are some things worth mentioning. . . At 188th St there are indeed many bus routes, but all of these are also available at 179th. Furthermore, at 169th, there are two additional bus routes available (Q30 and Q31) and yet they extended to 179th. Also, if there was a train at 188th, it's possible that the Q17 and Q3 would have been reorganized (along with other related routes as necessary) such that they became one route crossing Hillside Ave without turning. Same goes for the Q76/77 at Francis Lewis if there was a train available there. It's not always that the bus routes are all around and calling out for the train. Some bus routes exist (as they are) for the very reason that there is the lack of a train. |
|
|
(Sponsored) |
iPhone 6 (4.7 Inch) Premium PU Leather Wallet Case - Red w/ Floral Interior - by Notch-It |
|
| (1445948) | |
Re: Question: Why No Station at 188th Street/Hillside Avenue? |
|
|
Posted by TerrApin Station on Tue Aug 8 18:19:53 2017, in response to Re: Question: Why No Station at 188th Street/Hillside Avenue?, posted by Union Tpke on Tue Aug 8 18:12:21 2017. Yep. He doesn't understand that. |
|
|
| (1445949) | |
Re: Question: Why No Station at 188th Street/Hillside Avenue? |
|
|
Posted by Michael549 on Tue Aug 8 18:45:48 2017, in response to Re: Question: Why No Station at 188th Street/Hillside Avenue?, posted by New Flyer #857 on Tue Aug 8 18:17:49 2017. As I understand several Queens bus routes were re-organized with the opening of the Archer Avenue subway stations, and the closing of the J-train terminal at 168th Street.Mike |
|
|
| (1445952) | |
Re: Question: Why No Station at 188th Street/Hillside Avenue? |
|
|
Posted by Joe V on Tue Aug 8 18:54:49 2017, in response to Question: Why No Station at 188th Street/Hillside Avenue?, posted by Mitch45 on Tue Aug 8 18:02:44 2017. It was never intended to be forever terminus, but it likely is. |
|
|
| (1445954) | |
Re: Question: Why No Station at 188th Street/Hillside Avenue? |
|
|
Posted by New Flyer #857 on Tue Aug 8 18:56:47 2017, in response to Re: Question: Why No Station at 188th Street/Hillside Avenue?, posted by Michael549 on Tue Aug 8 18:45:48 2017. Right, and if the Hillside Ave subway went further east, there would be more restructuring. Definitely less bus routes on Hillside itself, or at least more short-turns at the nearest subway station to the bus route's outer end, where everyone would get off. Some Long Island bus routes, or at least runs, would likely detour away from Jamaica or Flushing and instead end at the extended Hillside line at its easternmost point.Not to mention population shifts that may result from the subway being there. Areas like Bellerose, Floral Park, and Glen Oaks would likely attract different types/amounts of people, and Little Neck Parkway may very well have developed a much higher demand for a bus route than just the couple of buses per hour it sees on weekdays today. The entire Q36 itself may have shifted completely to Jamaica Ave (and off of Hillside) for example, and, barring union differences, could be integrated more with the Q110. Simply put, looking at today's bus map doesn't tell the whole story on whether it was the best thing to build a subway terminal in a certain spot decades ago. |
|
|
| (1445955) | |
Re: Question: Why No Station at 188th Street/Hillside Avenue? |
|
|
Posted by Joe V on Tue Aug 8 18:58:04 2017, in response to Re: Question: Why No Station at 188th Street/Hillside Avenue?, posted by Michael549 on Tue Aug 8 18:45:48 2017. Some of the buses that hovered around 169th Street were restructured to serve Archer/Parsons instead, like the N4 and numerous Q buses. |
|
|
| (1445973) | |
Re: Question: Why No Station at 188th Street/Hillside Avenue? |
|
|
Posted by Bill from Maspeth on Tue Aug 8 20:31:20 2017, in response to Question: Why No Station at 188th Street/Hillside Avenue?, posted by Mitch45 on Tue Aug 8 18:02:44 2017. They would have to extend it longer than that to relay and layup trains. |
|
|
| (1445974) | |
Re: Question: Why No Station at 188th Street/Hillside Avenue? |
|
|
Posted by Bill from Maspeth on Tue Aug 8 20:33:39 2017, in response to Re: Question: Why No Station at 188th Street/Hillside Avenue?, posted by Bill from Maspeth on Tue Aug 8 20:31:20 2017. Oops, should have read the responses first. |
|
|
| (1445988) | |
Re: Question: Why No Station at 188th Street/Hillside Avenue? |
|
|
Posted by Mitch45 on Wed Aug 9 00:40:36 2017, in response to Re: Question: Why No Station at 188th Street/Hillside Avenue?, posted by TerrApin Station on Tue Aug 8 18:19:53 2017. Look who crawled out from under his rock. |
|
|
| (1445994) | |
Re: Question: Why No Station at 188th Street/Hillside Avenue? |
|
|
Posted by Broadway Lion on Wed Aug 9 07:42:08 2017, in response to Re: Question: Why No Station at 188th Street/Hillside Avenue?, posted by New Flyer #857 on Tue Aug 8 18:17:49 2017. We do not design subways to accommodate bus routes.We design bus routes to accommodate subways. When the Hilside line was builded there was nothing there. They builded buildings after the subway went in. The end of the subway marks the end of high density housing. Can we extend the subway, sure, easiest thing in the world (if you have money) But now that those areas are builded up it would be dificult to install high density housing, ergo Better served by bus or better yet light rail or feeder beese. |
|
|
| (1445998) | |
Re: Question: Why No Station at 188th Street/Hillside Avenue? |
|
|
Posted by Stephen Bauman on Wed Aug 9 08:04:17 2017, in response to Re: Question: Why No Station at 188th Street/Hillside Avenue?, posted by Broadway Lion on Wed Aug 9 07:42:08 2017. Lower density housing is being replaced by higher density housing all over. Examples are: Flushing; Long Island City; downtown Brooklyn etc. In most cases the high density housing represents high end gentrification. |
|
|
| (1445999) | |
Re: Question: Why No Station at 188th Street/Hillside Avenue? |
|
|
Posted by TerrApin Station on Wed Aug 9 08:07:37 2017, in response to Re: Question: Why No Station at 188th Street/Hillside Avenue?, posted by Mitch45 on Wed Aug 9 00:40:36 2017. You missed me? Good. |
|
|
| (1446001) | |
Re: Question: Why No Station at 188th Street/Hillside Avenue? |
|
|
Posted by TerrApin Station on Wed Aug 9 08:09:51 2017, in response to Re: Question: Why No Station at 188th Street/Hillside Avenue?, posted by Bill from Maspeth on Tue Aug 8 20:33:39 2017. It's ok. Mitch45 won't understand it unless you repeat it. Maybe. |
|
|
| (1446011) | |
Re: Question: Why No Station at 188th Street/Hillside Avenue? |
|
|
Posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Wed Aug 9 08:46:14 2017, in response to Re: Question: Why No Station at 188th Street/Hillside Avenue?, posted by Michael549 on Tue Aug 8 18:45:48 2017. Yes, dramatically. Most buses fed 169th and Hillside were rerouted to Jamaica Center. 169th was a madhouse prior to Archer opening, it was not really built to handle the follow it did. |
|
|
| (1446013) | |
Re: Question: Why No Station at 188th Street/Hillside Avenue? |
|
|
Posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Wed Aug 9 08:50:37 2017, in response to Re: Question: Why No Station at 188th Street/Hillside Avenue?, posted by Michael549 on Tue Aug 8 18:45:48 2017. Yes, dramatically. Most buses fed 169th and Hillside were rerouted to Jamaica Center. 169th was a madhouse prior to Archer opening, it was not really built to handle the flow it did. |
|
|
| (1446014) | |
Re: Question: Why No Station at 188th Street/Hillside Avenue? |
|
|
Posted by New Flyer #857 on Wed Aug 9 08:56:31 2017, in response to Re: Question: Why No Station at 188th Street/Hillside Avenue?, posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Wed Aug 9 08:46:14 2017. For your convenience. . .1975 map |
|
|
| (1446015) | |
Re: Question: Why No Station at 188th Street/Hillside Avenue? |
|
|
Posted by AlM on Wed Aug 9 09:00:56 2017, in response to Re: Question: Why No Station at 188th Street/Hillside Avenue?, posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Wed Aug 9 08:50:37 2017. Ah, flow. I was wondering what you meant to say when your phone filled in "follow" for you. :) |
|
|
| (1446019) | |
Re: Question: Why No Station at 188th Street/Hillside Avenue? |
|
|
Posted by Bill Newkirk on Wed Aug 9 10:02:26 2017, in response to Question: Why No Station at 188th Street/Hillside Avenue?, posted by Mitch45 on Tue Aug 8 18:02:44 2017. Only enough money earmarked to 179th St ?Bill Newkirk |
|
|
| (1446020) | |
Re: Question: Why No Station at 188th Street/Hillside Avenue? |
|
|
Posted by Broadway Lion on Wed Aug 9 10:37:36 2017, in response to Re: Question: Why No Station at 188th Street/Hillside Avenue?, posted by Stephen Bauman on Wed Aug 9 08:04:17 2017. Yup... And that is not going to go in so far from the city, Flushing notwithstanding.ROAR |
|
|
| (1446024) | |
Re: Question: Why No Station at 188th Street/Hillside Avenue? |
|
|
Posted by TUNNELRAT on Wed Aug 9 11:49:00 2017, in response to Re: Question: Why No Station at 188th Street/Hillside Avenue?, posted by TerrApin Station on Wed Aug 9 08:07:37 2017. do you miss a toothache? |
|
|
| (1446025) | |
Re: Question: Why No Station at 188th Street/Hillside Avenue? |
|
|
Posted by Mitch45 on Wed Aug 9 11:52:05 2017, in response to Re: Question: Why No Station at 188th Street/Hillside Avenue?, posted by TerrApin Station on Wed Aug 9 08:07:37 2017. As much as the hemorrhoid I had removed some years back. |
|
|
| (1446027) | |
Re: Question: Why No Station at 188th Street/Hillside Avenue? |
|
|
Posted by Spider-Pig on Wed Aug 9 12:13:45 2017, in response to Re: Question: Why No Station at 188th Street/Hillside Avenue?, posted by New Flyer #857 on Wed Aug 9 08:56:31 2017. The high resolution map is gone thanks to the fall of Megaupload. |
|
|
| (1446028) | |
Re: Question: Why No Station at 188th Street/Hillside Avenue? |
|
|
Posted by Edwards! on Wed Aug 9 12:41:53 2017, in response to Re: Question: Why No Station at 188th Street/Hillside Avenue?, posted by Mitch45 on Wed Aug 9 00:40:36 2017. Hes been here...just not as the "turtle". |
|
|
| (1446029) | |
Underground Layup (Re: Question: Why No Station at 188th Street/Hillside Avenue?) |
|
|
Posted by Mitch45 on Wed Aug 9 12:45:29 2017, in response to Re: Question: Why No Station at 188th Street/Hillside Avenue?, posted by Union Tpke on Tue Aug 8 18:12:21 2017. Not necessarily. The MTA could build an underground layup area between 179th and 188th. One already exists on the west side IRT between 137th - City College and 145th. |
|
|
| (1446030) | |
Re: Underground Layup (Re: Question: Why No Station at 188th Street/Hillside Avenue?) |
|
|
Posted by Spider-Pig on Wed Aug 9 12:50:03 2017, in response to Underground Layup (Re: Question: Why No Station at 188th Street/Hillside Avenue?), posted by Mitch45 on Wed Aug 9 12:45:29 2017. And now you're adding even more to the cost of this supposed simple extension. |
|
|
| (1446031) | |
Re: Underground Layup (Re: Question: Why No Station at 188th Street/Hillside Avenue?) |
|
|
Posted by SLRT on Wed Aug 9 12:54:43 2017, in response to Re: Underground Layup (Re: Question: Why No Station at 188th Street/Hillside Avenue?), posted by Spider-Pig on Wed Aug 9 12:50:03 2017. For once I'll say a bus reroute would be a better option. |
|
|
| (1446032) | |
Re: Question: Why No Station at 188th Street/Hillside Avenue? |
|
|
Posted by Mitch45 on Wed Aug 9 12:58:19 2017, in response to Re: Question: Why No Station at 188th Street/Hillside Avenue?, posted by Broadway Lion on Wed Aug 9 07:42:08 2017. "When the Hilside line was builded there was nothing there. They builded buildings after the subway went in."Au contraire, mon cher. Of course that part of Jamaica was already built up when the IND came in. The entire idea of the IND as envisioned by Hylan was to build in areas already served by the elevated, particularly BMT elevated. When the IND came in, the area was already long served by the Jamaica BMT elevated which ran a few blocks south on Jamaica Avenue. In the book "Building the Independent Subway" there's a photo of LaGuardia leading a parade past the new subway entrance at 169th Street. There were already many stores on Hillside Avenue at that time. Another poster stated that 179th Street probably was never intended to be the end of the line but between the Depression, World War II and the general switch to automobiles after the war, no further extensions were built and 179th Street remained the terminal. I think that's the most reasonable explanation. |
|
|
| (1446033) | |
Re: Question: Why No Station at 188th Street/Hillside Avenue? |
|
|
Posted by Mitch45 on Wed Aug 9 12:59:36 2017, in response to Re: Question: Why No Station at 188th Street/Hillside Avenue?, posted by TerrApin Station on Wed Aug 9 08:09:51 2017. Dumbass. |
|
|
| (1446034) | |
Re: Question: Why No Station at 188th Street/Hillside Avenue? |
|
|
Posted by Mitch45 on Wed Aug 9 13:00:10 2017, in response to Re: Question: Why No Station at 188th Street/Hillside Avenue?, posted by Bill from Maspeth on Tue Aug 8 20:31:20 2017. Why not build an underground layup like the one on the west side IRT between 137th and 145th? |
|
|
| (1446035) | |
Re: Question: Why No Station at 188th Street/Hillside Avenue? |
|
|
Posted by Mitch45 on Wed Aug 9 13:01:10 2017, in response to Re: Question: Why No Station at 188th Street/Hillside Avenue?, posted by Bill Newkirk on Wed Aug 9 10:02:26 2017. That's probably why it never went past 179th. I just think the public would be better served if it ended at a major street like 188th, especially since the tracks are already in to 184th. |
|
|
| (1446036) | |
Re: Underground Layup (Re: Question: Why No Station at 188th Street/Hillside Avenue?) |
|
|
Posted by Mitch45 on Wed Aug 9 13:07:01 2017, in response to Re: Underground Layup (Re: Question: Why No Station at 188th Street/Hillside Avenue?), posted by Spider-Pig on Wed Aug 9 12:50:03 2017. well, no transit project is cheap. It took the MTA 13 years to build 1500 feet of tunnel and appropriate switches to connect the 63rd Street line with the QB line. I can't imagine that the project didn't run significantly over budget.That being said, I don't see why it would be so expensive to build a wider tunnel to allow for layup tracks and switches between stations. The engineering already exists. To save costs, the station at 188th Street could be two tracks rather than the four track stations up to 179th Street. |
|
|
| (1446037) | |
Re: Underground Layup (Re: Question: Why No Station at 188th Street/Hillside Avenue?) |
|
|
Posted by Mitch45 on Wed Aug 9 13:07:57 2017, in response to Re: Underground Layup (Re: Question: Why No Station at 188th Street/Hillside Avenue?), posted by SLRT on Wed Aug 9 12:54:43 2017. Have you seen the traffic conditions on Hillside Avenue? They're brutal, almost as bad as on Jamaica Avenue. |
|
|
| (1446038) | |
Re: Question: Why No Station at 188th Street/Hillside Avenue? |
|
|
Posted by Mitch45 on Wed Aug 9 13:08:40 2017, in response to Re: Question: Why No Station at 188th Street/Hillside Avenue?, posted by New Flyer #857 on Tue Aug 8 18:56:47 2017. True, but that doesn't mean it has to remain a terminal today. |
|
|
| (1446044) | |
Re: Question: Why No Station at 188th Street/Hillside Avenue? |
|
|
Posted by Bill from Maspeth on Wed Aug 9 14:35:47 2017, in response to Re: Question: Why No Station at 188th Street/Hillside Avenue?, posted by Mitch45 on Wed Aug 9 13:00:10 2017. Backtracking trains to there and back would increase operating costs. Plus you need space at the terminal anyway for at least 2 gap trains. |
|
|
| (1446047) | |
Re: Question: Why No Station at 188th Street/Hillside Avenue? |
|
|
Posted by Mitch45 on Wed Aug 9 14:45:28 2017, in response to Re: Question: Why No Station at 188th Street/Hillside Avenue?, posted by Bill from Maspeth on Wed Aug 9 14:35:47 2017. Every expansion of the system increases operating costs. Operating costs go up every year no matter what. That shouldn't stop building useful extensions. |
|
|
| (1446049) | |
Re: Question: Why No Station at 188th Street/Hillside Avenue? |
|
|
Posted by Spider-Pig on Wed Aug 9 15:43:32 2017, in response to Re: Question: Why No Station at 188th Street/Hillside Avenue?, posted by Mitch45 on Wed Aug 9 12:58:19 2017. Au contraire, mon cher. Of course that part of Jamaica was already built up when the IND came in. The entire idea of the IND as envisioned by Hylan was to build in areas already served by the elevated, particularly BMT elevated. When the IND came in, the area was already long served by the Jamaica BMT elevated which ran a few blocks south on Jamaica Avenue.PWNED! Thank you. Also, even the BMT was built to an already built-up Jamaica. Although the arrival of subway service contributed to densification. Given the two level layup past 179th, it is possible that 179th Street was intended as the LOCAL terminal, with express service continuing beyond, either replacing 71st Avenue in that role, or ending the express-local there (the E before 1988) and continuing only with the express-express (the F before 1988) as a two track line. |
|
|
| (1446050) | |
Re: Underground Layup (Re: Question: Why No Station at 188th Street/Hillside Avenue?) |
|
|
Posted by Spider-Pig on Wed Aug 9 15:46:47 2017, in response to Re: Underground Layup (Re: Question: Why No Station at 188th Street/Hillside Avenue?), posted by Mitch45 on Wed Aug 9 13:07:57 2017. Not really. It actually gets worse west of 179th. I often used Hillside as an alternative to the Grand Central when going between Mineola to Jamaica. |
|
|
| (1446053) | |
Re: Question: Why No Station at 188th Street/Hillside Avenue? |
|
|
Posted by Bill from Maspeth on Wed Aug 9 16:08:55 2017, in response to Re: Question: Why No Station at 188th Street/Hillside Avenue?, posted by Mitch45 on Wed Aug 9 14:45:28 2017. Systems are trying to save operating costs, especially when NEW building takes place. Therefore, the most economical place to layup your trains is just beyond your station, not farther down the line. |
|
|
| (1446054) | |
Re: Question: Why No Station at 188th Street/Hillside Avenue? |
|
|
Posted by Bill from Maspeth on Wed Aug 9 16:09:23 2017, in response to Re: Question: Why No Station at 188th Street/Hillside Avenue?, posted by Mitch45 on Wed Aug 9 14:45:28 2017. Systems are trying to save operating costs, especially when NEW building takes place. Therefore, the most economical place to layup your trains is just beyond your station, not farther down the line. |
|
|
| (1446056) | |
Re: Underground Layup (Re: Question: Why No Station at 188th Street/Hillside Avenue?) |
|
|
Posted by LuchAAA on Wed Aug 9 16:17:01 2017, in response to Re: Underground Layup (Re: Question: Why No Station at 188th Street/Hillside Avenue?), posted by Spider-Pig on Wed Aug 9 15:46:47 2017. Hillside as an alternative to GCP?Things must be really bad to go local. |
|
|
| (1446058) | |
Re: Question: Why No Station at 188th Street/Hillside Avenue? |
|
|
Posted by Spider-Pig on Wed Aug 9 16:23:30 2017, in response to Re: Question: Why No Station at 188th Street/Hillside Avenue?, posted by Bill Newkirk on Wed Aug 9 10:02:26 2017. 179th Street was built significantly later than the rest of the line. 169th opened in 1939 and 179th in 1950. It was the last station of the classic IND to be opened. The next new subway station was Grant Avenue in 1956. |
|
|
| (1446067) | |
Re: Underground Layup (Re: Question: Why No Station at 188th Street/Hillside Avenue?) |
|
|
Posted by jailhousedoc on Wed Aug 9 17:34:07 2017, in response to Re: Underground Layup (Re: Question: Why No Station at 188th Street/Hillside Avenue?), posted by Mitch45 on Wed Aug 9 13:07:01 2017. the Queens Blvd. line was supposed to go east as far as Little Neck Parkway - according to the Second System proposed expansion plans, but due to the Great Depression, WW 2 and some other things, it never happened. The population is now much larger than it was back in the '60, '70s and so forth - adding more bus lines is not going to get it. Spend the money and build more lines - the need is there and the politicians give tax breaks to their friends and ignore the necessary. |
|
|
| (1446068) | |
Re: Question: Why No Station at 188th Street/Hillside Avenue? |
|
|
Posted by jailhousedoc on Wed Aug 9 17:40:39 2017, in response to Question: Why No Station at 188th Street/Hillside Avenue?, posted by Mitch45 on Tue Aug 8 18:02:44 2017. the Queens Blvd. line was supposed to go east as far as Little Neck Parkway - according to the Second System proposed expansion plans, but due to the Great Depression, WW 2 and some other things, it never happened. The population is now much larger than it was back in the '60s, '70s and so forth - adding more bus lines is not going to get it. Spend the money and build more lines - the need is there and the politicians give tax breaks to their friends and ignore the necessary.More lines built with planning can also deal with accidents and delays by providing alternate routing of trains to get around areas with signal problems, malfunctioning trains, police activity and the like. |
|
|
| (1446074) | |
Re: Underground Layup (Re: Question: Why No Station at 188th Street/Hillside Avenue?) |
|
|
Posted by Joe V on Wed Aug 9 17:47:35 2017, in response to Re: Underground Layup (Re: Question: Why No Station at 188th Street/Hillside Avenue?), posted by Mitch45 on Wed Aug 9 13:07:01 2017. It is very difficult to tunnel in the LIC area due to water. I don't know if Jamaica area is any better. |
|
|
| (1446075) | |
Re: Question: Why No Station at 188th Street/Hillside Avenue? |
|
|
Posted by Joe V on Wed Aug 9 17:52:09 2017, in response to Re: Question: Why No Station at 188th Street/Hillside Avenue?, posted by Mitch45 on Wed Aug 9 13:01:10 2017. If you extended service via the upper level 1 stop, the lower level yard would remain (or be abandoned), then you'd have to build tail tracks to replace the ones you punched through. With just F service and a few odd-ball E's, would you terminate half the F's at 179th, and the other half at say 188th ? |
|
|
| (1446079) | |
Re: Question: Why No Station at 188th Street/Hillside Avenue? |
|
|
Posted by Joe V on Wed Aug 9 18:04:41 2017, in response to Re: Question: Why No Station at 188th Street/Hillside Avenue?, posted by Broadway Lion on Wed Aug 9 07:42:08 2017. In areas of Kew Gardens and Richmond Hill, I remember lots with mansions in the 1960's. Now some are replaced by tall brick apartment buidlings, or attached garden apartments..Nothing is forever. |
|
|
| (1446080) | |
Re: Question: Why No Station at 188th Street/Hillside Avenue? |
|
|
Posted by Joe V on Wed Aug 9 18:06:06 2017, in response to Re: Question: Why No Station at 188th Street/Hillside Avenue?, posted by Spider-Pig on Wed Aug 9 15:43:32 2017. They did try running BRT el car trains on street car trackage east of Cypress Hills to Jamaica prior to 1917. |
|
|
| (1446084) | |
Re: Underground Layup (Re: Question: Why No Station at 188th Street/Hillside Avenue?) |
|
|
Posted by Catfish 44 on Wed Aug 9 18:14:44 2017, in response to Re: Underground Layup (Re: Question: Why No Station at 188th Street/Hillside Avenue?), posted by LuchAAA on Wed Aug 9 16:17:01 2017. They are. |
|
|
|
|
Page 1 of 3 |
|
