|
|
| A Transit Robert Moses Guy (384012) | |
 |
|
| Home > SubChat | |
[ Post a New Response | Return to the Index ]
|
|
Page 1 of 9 |
|
|
| (384012) | |
A Transit Robert Moses Guy |
|
|
Posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Fri Feb 9 14:16:58 2007 So, RM's tenure lasted almost a half a century. 45 years is a long time, so of course public attitudes changed in that time. At the beginning of his tenure, people applauded his bulldozer tactics, at the end, they were lamented.During those years he accomplished an huge amount of projects. Some of them were good, some truly outstanding, and some pretty bad. Regardless of whether we like him or not, a lot can be learned about getting public projects done....both good ways and bad ways from Robert Moses. Robert Moses was a guy of his time. The public interest was away from transit, and towards roads at the time. That was his era, and that's what the public wanted, at least near the beginning of his reign. Of course today, public interest is more transit oriented. Now suppose we had a new RM-type guy, except this time he was a transit oriented guy. What are some of the specific projects that you think would get done. Now remember, he can use RM tactics to get them done. And as a sidenote to that, would we be as critical of this guy as some of us are about RM is if it was trasit projects getting done? Remember 50 years from now, there may be a new attitude. So any ideas? |
|
|
| (384034) | |
Re: A Transit Robert Moses Guy |
|
|
Posted by PATHman on Fri Feb 9 14:53:21 2007, in response to A Transit Robert Moses Guy, posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Fri Feb 9 14:16:58 2007. Robert Moses was a racist, self-serving bastard. His policies destroyed the Bronx, nearly destroyed the Village, and hindered the expansion of the subway. Staten Island can thank him for their lack of mass transit service. Half of the city is inaccessible by rail because of this man. He is a truly despicable figure (just like Boss Tweed). He can burn in hell. The modern day Robert Moses probably would be Sheldon Silver. |
|
|
| (384069) | |
Re: A Transit Robert Moses Guy |
|
|
Posted by The Port of Authority on Fri Feb 9 15:49:14 2007, in response to A Transit Robert Moses Guy, posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Fri Feb 9 14:16:58 2007. During those years he accomplished an huge amount ofprojects. Some of them were good, some truly outstanding, and some pretty bad. IAWTP Not all of Moses's projects were bad. Sure, some of them were terrible, but that doesn't mean that the rest were. |
|
|
(Sponsored) |
iPhone 6 (4.7 Inch) Premium PU Leather Wallet Case - Red w/ Floral Interior - by Notch-It |
|
| (384081) | |
Re: A Transit Robert Moses Guy |
|
|
Posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Fri Feb 9 16:16:53 2007, in response to Re: A Transit Robert Moses Guy, posted by The Port of Authority on Fri Feb 9 15:49:14 2007. Oh absolutely. Some of his tactics were bad, bu there's no denying that many of the bridges and highways needed to be built. NY would be crippled without some of the bridges like the Verrazano, Throgs Neck, etc, or without the Long Island Express or many of the parkways. |
|
|
| (384084) | |
Re: A Transit Robert Moses Guy |
|
|
Posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Fri Feb 9 16:23:39 2007, in response to Re: A Transit Robert Moses Guy, posted by PATHman on Fri Feb 9 14:53:21 2007. This wasn't the point of the thread, however, he was man of his time too, especially at the beginning. People WANTED many of the bridges and roads to be built, again, especially at the beginning. The Bronx was burning even before the Cross Bronx went through (although, no it didn't need even more misery, I mean look at Bushwick, and many parts of Brooklyn, those areas fell just like the Bronx, without any help from the unbuilt Bushwick Expressway. And no, it's not just him that didn't encourage mass transit on SI, it was a complete wilderness, many decades from development, so there was no reason to build transit there, at the time the areas that needed it got it. SI wasn't involved in the transit uprise that the other boroughs got because it was just a baren wilderness. Queens and Bronx were too, but at least people could see that development was coming quickly, unlike completely unaccessible SI.And no, half the city is not inaccessible because of him, again, IT WAS A different time. People looked at transit at as old fashioned back then. People wanted cars, and they wanted the roads that cars needed. it's easy to sit here and criticize an former era's thinking, but THAT was the thought back then. Today people have different attutudes toward transit than they had in the 40's and 50's. |
|
|
| (384113) | |
Re: A Transit Robert Moses Guy |
|
|
Posted by DCmetrogreen on Fri Feb 9 17:24:16 2007, in response to Re: A Transit Robert Moses Guy, posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Fri Feb 9 16:23:39 2007. I feel the attitude toward expanding rail transit is all wrong. It shouldn't be take the train to the pepole but if you build it they will come. |
|
|
| (384118) | |
Re: A Transit Robert Moses Guy |
|
|
Posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Fri Feb 9 17:35:10 2007, in response to Re: A Transit Robert Moses Guy, posted by DCmetrogreen on Fri Feb 9 17:24:16 2007. Of course, and that has been done in the past....however, when the people are already there, you have to bring the transit through, however once they are already there....they become NIMBY's. |
|
|
| (384132) | |
Re: A Transit Robert Moses Guy |
|
|
Posted by ntrainride on Fri Feb 9 17:56:37 2007, in response to Re: A Transit Robert Moses Guy, posted by PATHman on Fri Feb 9 14:53:21 2007. "...His policies destroyed the Bronx..."Scapegoating is easy but facts can't be denied. Fact is, anything that happened in the Bronx was not related to the construction of a six lane highway. Fact is, the gestalt after WW II was not a deep desire to re-inhabit pre-war environs. A large percentage of the population wanted to leave the city behind. A large percentage of the population wanted to raise families in "country" settings. A large percentage of the population finally had the means to pursue these desires. A large percentage of the population done went and gone. The highways Moses built were not the causative factors in the preceeding events, much as some wish to believe so. I understand that wish, as it always makes it easier to grasp historical events if certain aspects of past events can be synopsised into compact labels. Just makes it easier to deal with. But as usual, true facts are much, much messier. Whatever Moses did was in response to what the people were clamoring for. |
|
|
| (384143) | |
Re: A Transit Robert Moses Guy |
|
|
Posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Fri Feb 9 18:06:57 2007, in response to Re: A Transit Robert Moses Guy, posted by ntrainride on Fri Feb 9 17:56:37 2007. Exactly. People WANTED it at the time. In the 40's and 50's, people DIDN'T want "old fashioned" subways. They wanted roads for their cars. They didn't want the "old fashioned" cities. They wanted the suburbs. Robert Moses didn't destroy the Bronx. The Bronx was on nfire before the Cross Bronx went through. And like I said, neighborhoods like Bushwick fell all on their own without a 6 lane highway cutting through. The Bronx would have fell regardless of the Cross Bronx or not. |
|
|
| (384241) | |
Re: A Transit Robert Moses Guy |
|
|
Posted by Mark Michalovic on Fri Feb 9 21:57:59 2007, in response to Re: A Transit Robert Moses Guy, posted by DCmetrogreen on Fri Feb 9 17:24:16 2007. I feel the attitude toward expanding rail transit is all wrong. It shouldn't be take the train to the pepole but if you build it they will come.That is an excellent point. That's a big part of transit-oriented development, and it's something leaders here in Philly really need to be aware of. We could really use two or three more subway lines, but at the same time, we could do a lot more with the ones we have. We could foster development around underutilized stations on the Broad Street subway and the Market-Frankford el. But no, here any regulations on development seem to exist only so pols can charge developers to waive them. So we put new developments in absoutely anywhere, then fret about where we'll put all the additional auto traffic. Ugh. |
|
|
| (384242) | |
Re: A Transit Robert Moses Guy |
|
|
Posted by Edwards! on Fri Feb 9 21:59:13 2007, in response to Re: A Transit Robert Moses Guy, posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Fri Feb 9 18:06:57 2007. "Jusat close enough To the city..but NOT PART OF IT..."as in the case with Long Island,Westchester,New Jersey and part of New England."Close enough to USE IT'S RESORCES..but not contribute TOTALLY..ESPECIALLY taxes"..Like having the house with the backyard..with 2.5 children and the dog named FUFFY. Moses used the city as a sounding board to help move them right on out at OUR expense...and I do MEAN OURS.. His pitifull attempts at "smoothing over the rabble" with his parks and socalled PUBLIC HOUSING UNITS has done nothing more than further URBAN BLIGHT in our neighborhoods.. His "views" of what the "public" wanted was nothing more than one of his childhood fantasys of jerking off in a public bathroom,while others watched,saying "Look Ma,One Hand is all I need now!" This "man" never even drove a car..! Sure he "helped develope" neighborhoods..OUTSIDE of NYC..cause considering what he did with Styvasant Town..especially his views on BLACK AMERICAN WAR VETS...or Blacks/Hispanics period..had alot to do some of his "choices". I UNDERSTAND that if HE did come along when he did..most of our roadways/bridges that were built wouldn't exist.. But..his METHODS were HORRID..his MANOR likewise...and I am truely amazed that he was able to pull off most of the things that he did without someone putting a bullit in his temple! I have NO PRAISE for this man.. |
|
|
| (384243) | |
Re: A Transit Robert Moses Guy |
|
|
Posted by Mark Michalovic on Fri Feb 9 22:00:59 2007, in response to Re: A Transit Robert Moses Guy, posted by ntrainride on Fri Feb 9 17:56:37 2007. Fact is, the gestalt after WW II was not a deep desire to re-inhabit pre-war environs.Fact is, there had been an anti-city bent to our culture since the colonial days. After all, English farmers who wanted city life could more easily move to London. It was people who wanted something rural and rugged who came to America, and the attitudes of these settlers have shaped our culture for centuries. |
|
|
| (384244) | |
Re: A Transit Robert Moses Guy |
|
|
Posted by RonInBayside on Fri Feb 9 22:05:15 2007, in response to Re: A Transit Robert Moses Guy, posted by ntrainride on Fri Feb 9 17:56:37 2007. Also,manufacturing started to decline in the 1940s-1950s as the war contracts dried up. As one example, the helicopter industry, a major Long Island/CT employer, struggled to find financing (Sikorsky built military airplanes and thaty provided money for helicopter development) - then Korea arrived.Camden was a major manufacturing center, part of the "arsenal of democracy" in the 1940s. |
|
|
| (384245) | |
Re: A Transit Robert Moses Guy |
|
|
Posted by Mark Michalovic on Fri Feb 9 22:07:35 2007, in response to A Transit Robert Moses Guy, posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Fri Feb 9 14:16:58 2007. That's a really interesting thought. We might see something like what you're talking about in Los Angeles in the next few decades, what with public support turning toward transit, and Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa strongly supporting transit expansion. Already they have two lines under construction, the Gold Line to East LA and the Exposition Line, and now with the Waxman law being repealled the extenstion of the Wilshire Purple (formerly Red) Line to the sea might be coming soon, too.I'd love to see something like is happening in LA with transit happen more places. (I never thought I'd be saying that!) Philly sure could use some vision and drive like that. |
|
|
| (384246) | |
Re: A Transit Robert Moses Guy |
|
|
Posted by (SIR) North Shore Line on Fri Feb 9 22:07:39 2007, in response to Re: A Transit Robert Moses Guy, posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Fri Feb 9 16:23:39 2007. I agree with your points on Staten Island. If the borough had developed at a slightly faster rate, we would've seen another subway/rail line courtesy of the BMT, IRT or IND but they had no reason to. The North Shore and South Shore branches were built ahead of their time and had B&O RR roughed it out and kept the lines for 12 more years, we wouldn't be asking for the re-opening of the line now.All the development didn't come until after Robert Moses had the SI Expressway and Verrazono Bridge completed in 1964. You can actually thank him for any development the borough gained afterwards. |
|
|
| (384417) | |
Re: A Transit Robert Moses Guy |
|
|
Posted by BrooklynBus on Sat Feb 10 11:33:36 2007, in response to A Transit Robert Moses Guy, posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Fri Feb 9 14:16:58 2007. No one thus far seems to have answered the original post question, so let me try. I think if this hypothetical transit RM guy were around today (which probably wouldn't even be possible because of all the environmental regulations and required community notification) I think we would be just as critical of him. You have to remember that Moses answered to no one and did as he pleased which is why we look at him so negatively today. For example he revived the idea of building the Triborough Bridge which had been stalled. However, he built it at 125 St for his own personal reasons (because a friend of his owned property in Manhattan at 96th St), as Caro points out, and not at 96th Street where it would have made a lot more sense because it would have saved commuters to Midtown from going two miles out of their way.So let's assume this Transit RM would act the same way and these were the projects he would build: 1) A York Avenue subway with one stop at 86 Street south to 63rd Street and turning into Queens past Roosevelt Island and Queensbridge then connecting with the G line to Brooklyn. You would have to transfer at 63rd Street to travel further south in Manhattan along 6th Avenue. The 86th Street Station would be built to prevent any further extension northward. 2) Extension of the Canarsie line south on Greenwich Street to the World Trade Center and continuing to Brooklyn via a new tunnel cutting through Brooklyn Heights and under Atlantic Avenue to hook up with the Long Island Rail Road. 3) Extension of the M line through Middle Village as an elevated line to terminate at Queens Center. Of course I'm not endorsing any of this or saying if any of these ideas make sense economically or for any other reason. But remember, not everything that RM did made sense either. It was only what he wanted. So that's it. Those are your choices. Remember, this new RM won't compromise either. Do you want these lines built or not? |
|
|
| (384423) | |
Re: A Transit Robert Moses Guy |
|
|
Posted by Bob Andersen on Sat Feb 10 11:53:16 2007, in response to Re: A Transit Robert Moses Guy, posted by PATHman on Fri Feb 9 14:53:21 2007. I used to feel the same as you do. But if you think about it, look at all he accomplished. Jones Beach, the Parkways, numerous other roads, bridges and tunnels. Yes, a lot of the City is inaccessible to rail because he neglected mass transit, but a lot of the City (and the suburbs) would be inaccessible by roads, too, if it weren't for him.I think that non-availability of rail transit in parts of the city is not because there was a Robert Moses, but because there wasn't a similar pro-mass transit person with his qualities (good and bad). |
|
|
| (384424) | |
Re: A Transit Robert Moses Guy |
|
|
Posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Sat Feb 10 11:59:41 2007, in response to Re: A Transit Robert Moses Guy, posted by Bob Andersen on Sat Feb 10 11:53:16 2007. I think that non-availability of rail transit in parts of the city is not because there was a Robert Moses, but because there wasn't a similar pro-mass transit person with his qualities (good and bad).You are absolutely correct. And you also have to throw in that most people in that era weren't interested in more transit. They wanted roads, and RM gave them what they wanted. You can't take today's more transit oriented mindset of people and compare it to the 40's and 50's, as there was no transit mindset back then. |
|
|
| (384427) | |
Re: A Transit Robert Moses Guy |
|
|
Posted by Bob Andersen on Sat Feb 10 12:15:50 2007, in response to Re: A Transit Robert Moses Guy, posted by Edwards! on Fri Feb 9 21:59:13 2007. "Close enough to USE IT'S RESORCES..but not contribute TOTALLY..ESPECIALLY taxes"..I've been working in the City for 37 years and I've lived on Long Island for the last 33 of those. Although there is no longer a commuter tax, I pay $thousands each year of NYS tax - some of which does go back to the city. Also, the company I work for, whose profits I contribute to, certainly pays city taxes. I attend Broadway shows, museums, ball games, etc. that contribute to the city's economy. I must disagree with you when you say people like me don't contribute! My dog is named Teddy, not Fluffy, and I have 1.0, not 2.5 children :-) |
|
|
| (384431) | |
Re: A Transit Robert Moses Guy |
|
|
Posted by BrooklynBus on Sat Feb 10 13:31:22 2007, in response to Re: A Transit Robert Moses Guy, posted by BrooklynBus on Sat Feb 10 11:33:36 2007. For (1) I should have said, you have to transfer at Roosevelt Island to go further downtown, not at 63rd St.And to show what a nice guy this Transit RM guy is, I've decided to also throw in East Side Access. And by working 16 hour days, all the projects can be completed within 5 years. You can have all of them or nothing at all. What is your choice? |
|
|
| (384439) | |
Re: A Transit Robert Moses Guy |
|
|
Posted by PATHman on Sat Feb 10 14:28:39 2007, in response to Re: A Transit Robert Moses Guy, posted by Bob Andersen on Sat Feb 10 11:53:16 2007. It's funny how you mentioned parkways. Moses intentionally built parkways in upscale areas so lower class citizens couldn't use public transportation to get to those areas. Only motorists using private transportation could get to those areas (Why do you think Jones Beach can only be accessed by parkways and not expressways?). The overpasses on the Southern State are ridiculously low for that same reason. It pisses me off when I see the blueprints for the IND 2nd System and I see how expansive the subway could've been had it not been for this conniving bigot. |
|
|
| (384462) | |
Re: A Transit Robert Moses Guy |
|
|
Posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Sat Feb 10 15:54:12 2007, in response to Re: A Transit Robert Moses Guy, posted by Edwards! on Fri Feb 9 21:59:13 2007. Jusat close enough To the city..but NOT PART OF IT..."as in the case with Long Island,Westchester,New Jersey and part of New England.That's not true. Just as healthy suburbs can't survive without a healthy city, a healthy city can't survive without healthy suburbs. They need eachother, rather than drain eachother. The suburbs are not a parasite of the city any more than a city is a parasite of it's suburbs. Close enough to USE IT'S RESORCES..but not contribute TOTALLY..ESPECIALLY taxes"..Like having the house with the backyard..with 2.5 children and the dog named FUFFY That's not true. Suburban commuters coming into the city, yes, do use resourses, but they also contribute to the economy of the city too by patronizing their businesses, conducting business. Lets see how many business owners would be unhappy if the suburban people stopped coming in to city. And the house with the backyard and the kids (and last I checked city people also had kids), and the dog are totally irrelevant. Moses used the city as a sounding board to help move them right on out at OUR expense...and I do MEAN OURS.. But those people WANTED to leave. It's not like anyone was forcing them out. That was the mindset in the 40's and 50's, and perhaps even into the 60's. His pitifull attempts at "smoothing over the rabble" with his parks and socalled PUBLIC HOUSING UNITS has done nothing more than further URBAN BLIGHT in our neighborhoods.. The parks were a good thing, and the parkways were built to take people out of the city and TO the parks in the suburbs. What happened after the parkways were built with development was after the parkways were built. As for the public housing, yes that did destroy neighborhoods. But again, it was a different mindset in that time by everyone, not just him. The housing that was knocked down "could" have been refurbished, but many of the buildings were 19th Century housing that was never upgraded. Many people lived pretty badly in many of those buildings. Back then it was an out with an old, in with the new mentality. Today we know better, that those old buildings can be refurbished. But back then, many people were living in slum-like housing. There's a housing authority website that shows just what some of these buildings were like. THIS photo was taken on Aug 24, 1955. This is the 50's, and look how these people were living!  Mrs. Walter Maloney with her five children, aged from 4 to 12, in the kitchen of their tenement apartment at 124 Moore Street in Bushwick, Brooklyn, August 24, 1955. The monthly rent for their five-room cold water flat was $17. The tenement was torn down to make way for the 1960 Bushwick Houses, a 16-acre project that houses 2,962 people. (The Maloneys are also pictured in THE SLUMS 2, image 9.)   This is presumably a pre-Old Law apartment, built prior to 1879 (windows/transoms between rooms where there are no windows on the outside), June 14, 1940. The Hennesey family lived in this tenement at 150 Norman Avenue in Greenpoint, Brooklyn, and were probably photographed as prospective tenants for a project then being constructed, such as Kingsborough Houses.  "There are revealing details of domestic consumption." Mrs. Herman Koenig, with her son and dog, doing laundry in the bathtub in the kitchen, August 11, 1941. The Koenig family were about to move out of their tenement and into Kingsborough Houses in Bedford Stuyvesant, Brooklyn. The 16 acre complex, completed in 1941, houses some 2,362 people. ID# 02.003.00060 Here's the Housing Authority Website showing this and more on it. Again, today, we are smarter, and know old buildings can be reconfigured, or refurbished. But we are talking the 1930's to 1960's which people had an out with the old in with the new attitude. And of course, SOMETHING had to be done with the way people were living in these places, especially after the Great Depression and WWII, that almost two decades of neglect to places that probably were run down even before the Depression. Yes, his methods were not always great, especuially near the end, but at the same time, people can't look past many of the good things, as well as the horrid things that were done. |
|
|
| (384467) | |
Re: A Transit Robert Moses Guy |
|
|
Posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Sat Feb 10 16:08:16 2007, in response to Re: A Transit Robert Moses Guy, posted by PATHman on Sat Feb 10 14:28:39 2007. It's funny how you mentioned parkways. Moses intentionally built parkways in upscale areas so lower class citizens couldn't use public transportation to get to those areas.The parkways were built THROUGH wilderness and farmland TO the parks. It was meant for people from the city to drive to the parks. The neighborhoods that sprung up around them were AFTER the parkways were there already. Only motorists using private transportation could get to those areas (Why do you think Jones Beach can only be accessed by parkways and not expressways?). Are you on drugs? What do expressways have to do with Jones Beach? Why would you want trucks on the roads going to Jones Beach. And don't tell me buses, as many of the parkways were built before buses came into vogue. And back then, there weren't even many trucks either abck then yet. The overpasses were built low because they were built for cars. The expressways came later, when trucks and buses had a foothold. You are taking TODAY's mentality and technology, and trying to apply it to the 1930's and 40's. It pisses me off when I see the blueprints for the IND 2nd System and I see how expansive the subway could've been had it not been for this conniving bigot. Robert Moses didn't "destroy" the 2nd System. Blame the Great Depression and WWII for the casualty of the Second System. Technology also changed in those two decades between when the IND was being planned, and the Depression and the war were over. By then, technology was moving towards cars and motor vehicles like buses, not subways and trolleys. Attitude of people was different towards subways. They were looked at as "old fashioned". Why do you think they tore up thousands and thousands of miles of electric trolley track infastructure throughout the country? "Buses were 'modern'". Hindsight is 20/20, and unfortunately, again, you are taking today's attitude on public transit, and trying to fit it into a different era. |
|
|
| (384469) | |
Re: A Transit Robert Moses Guy |
|
|
Posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Sat Feb 10 16:14:54 2007, in response to Re: A Transit Robert Moses Guy, posted by BrooklynBus on Sat Feb 10 11:33:36 2007. Thanks! Yes, that's what I really meant by this thread....I didn't really plan for it to become just another "Robert Moses" thread. Your post is the posts I had in mind. |
|
|
| (384489) | |
Re: A Transit Robert Moses Guy |
|
|
Posted by Edwards! on Sat Feb 10 16:50:41 2007, in response to Re: A Transit Robert Moses Guy, posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Sat Feb 10 16:08:16 2007. Ahhh..are you trying to say that Moses wasn't at least part responsible for the demise of the Second System?He was Directly involved with the haulting of the Van Wyck subway.. Directly involved with the "plug pulling" of the LIE subway.. Directly involved with the SAS being pulled by the city ,due to his being the only representive going to DC to get money for capital projects. Though he couldn't completly hault ALL subway building..he sure tried his damnedest to slow it down to a crawl... He even managed to pull the subway Unification out of the city budget..while keeping the TBTA,and its funding in tact..without the city being able to touch any of it funding. He conned the PORT AUTHORITY to help him construct one of his bridges..at the expense of a new rapid transit line to STATEN ISLAND..Then got them to scrap the 125th st bridge[the Narrows Bridge twin] to build the Narrows span! He fleeced the WORLDS FAIR out of MILLIONS of dollars..and didn't do one day of jail time. The guy was incouragable..without question.. |
|
|
| (384515) | |
Re: A Transit Robert Moses Guy |
|
|
Posted by The Port of Authority on Sat Feb 10 17:15:51 2007, in response to Re: A Transit Robert Moses Guy, posted by PATHman on Sat Feb 10 14:28:39 2007. Only motorists using private transportation could get to those areas (Why do you think Jones Beach can only be accessed by parkways and not expressways?)Explain this, then. |
|
|
| (384545) | |
Re: A Transit Robert Moses Guy |
|
|
Posted by Robert From Queens on Sat Feb 10 18:04:10 2007, in response to Re: A Transit Robert Moses Guy, posted by Edwards! on Sat Feb 10 16:50:41 2007. Thank you for this posting - you tell the truth.More points to note: 1) The Northern Parkway dips at least a half mile south off course around Old Westbury. Why you ask? He was forced by the rich of this area. No Cross Bronx slow-way thru their yards. 2) Why doesn't the Van Wyck have a rapid transit line going down the center? Its amazing how New York City has no direct transit connection to its International Airport. I don't count the Airtrain, because once again it was a case of shove it down their throats by a modern day Moses, the lawless and unaccountable to anybody Port Authority. 3) Why isn't there a transit line on the Whitestone Bridge? 4) Weren't the Parkways built with low overpasses so buses couldn't bring the riff-raff to "his" beaches. 5) Mr. Moses should be the poster boy for the three branches of government, and why each is needed, unless of course you want a King ala Mr. Bush (story for another day). 6) The jerk built more roads than anybody, but didn't learn to drive? What's wrong with this picture? 7) Just picture Manhattan with midtown and Lower Manhattan expressways. 8) Remember in conclusion "they don't know what's good for them." To Robert Caro, I say "Bravo to you." |
|
|
| (384551) | |
Re: A Transit Robert Moses Guy |
|
|
Posted by BrooklynBus on Sat Feb 10 18:10:56 2007, in response to Re: A Transit Robert Moses Guy, posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Sat Feb 10 16:08:16 2007. "The overpasses were built low because they were built for cars."Not totally true. Moses built the overpasses low to discourage buses from ever using the parkways. On some of the overpasses, a bus can only fit under it if it uses the left lane, but would hit it in the right lane. Just a foot higher would have corrected this problem. |
|
|
| (384560) | |
Re: A Transit Robert Moses Guy |
|
|
Posted by BrooklynBus on Sat Feb 10 18:18:40 2007, in response to Re: A Transit Robert Moses Guy, posted by Robert From Queens on Sat Feb 10 18:04:10 2007. I agree with everything you said but you also have to look at the other side of the coin. Picture Brooklyn without the Belt Parkway. Because of the Belt Parkway, I can get from Sheepshead Bay well into Nassau County or up to the Bronx by auto in the same amount of time it takes me to get to Park Slope during the evening rush hour, 45 minutes, (when the lights are timed for southbound traffic). Without the Belt Parkway, it would take me between 90 and 120 minutes to make that trip. |
|
|
| (384565) | |
Re: A Transit Robert Moses Guy |
|
|
Posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Sat Feb 10 18:26:13 2007, in response to Re: A Transit Robert Moses Guy, posted by BrooklynBus on Sat Feb 10 18:10:56 2007. The middle appears the highest to me. And again, in the 1930's, buses weren't all that popular....yet. |
|
|
| (384569) | |
Re: A Transit Robert Moses Guy |
|
|
Posted by Robert From Queens on Sat Feb 10 18:33:04 2007, in response to Re: A Transit Robert Moses Guy, posted by BrooklynBus on Sat Feb 10 18:18:40 2007. Agreed 100%!I just will never understand his insistence on "the car is king." Also, he was mean for the sake of being mean, especially because the Authority setup, where by selling bonds you can basically "print" money, helped make him a King, like it or not. You're right - In a way its good Moses built what he did, because today nothing can be built, and it isn't just from a $ point of view. The whole process is too complicated. I can't imagine two bridges being built within sight of each other, i.e. the Whitestone and Throgs Neck. The bottom line to me is, Moses could've been looked upon as a hero had he "caved" and allowed projects such as a rapid transit line down the Van Wyck to be built. Reminds me of Benedict Arnold - before he became a traitor, he could have been remembered as a hero. Bad judgement on both their parts. |
|
|
| (384571) | |
Re: A Transit Robert Moses Guy |
|
|
Posted by Robert From Queens on Sat Feb 10 18:34:55 2007, in response to Re: A Transit Robert Moses Guy, posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Sat Feb 10 18:26:13 2007. Chris, you can defend, or rationalize anything.Just look at Johnny Cochran and his bunch of dirt-bags. Oops, right maybe O.J. is still looking for the "real" killer. |
|
|
| (384574) | |
Re: A Transit Robert Moses Guy |
|
|
Posted by Jeff Rosen on Sat Feb 10 18:37:08 2007, in response to Re: A Transit Robert Moses Guy, posted by The Port of Authority on Sat Feb 10 17:15:51 2007. If I'm not mistaken the overpasses on the Meadowbrook from Merrick Road to Jones were always high enough to allow trucks supplying the beach to get there. Otherwise there would have been no deliveries whatsoever.Also the overpasses on most of the LI parkways have been rebuilt to allow buses when the parkways were widened. When I was a kid in the 50-60's no school buses were allowed on the parkways and when we went on field trips the buses had to take streets to the LIE. Now you see school buses on the parkways all the time. You also see NYC Transit express buses on the Grand Central deadheading.
|
|
|
| (384578) | |
Re: A Transit Robert Moses Guy |
|
|
Posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Sat Feb 10 18:41:27 2007, in response to Re: A Transit Robert Moses Guy, posted by Robert From Queens on Sat Feb 10 18:04:10 2007. 1) The Northern Parkway dips at least a half mile south off course around Old Westbury. Why you ask? He was forced by the rich of this area. No Cross Bronx slow-way thru their yards.So how is that HIS fault? he WANTED it to go straight, the community made it do it's roundabout run. When he came down to the Expressway, he in that case won out over them, and the LIE cuts through as it should. However, notice, they still didn't allow RM to design any exits there....that's still a long stretch without an exit or entrance... However, the final vestage of Old Westbury came full circle. Not anything to do with RM, but in the early 80's, when they were adding streetlights to the LIE from the city line to around exit 61, Old Westbury didn't allow them to put the lights through from exit 38 to exit 41... That was the famous "dark stretch, without exits" until recently. They must have softened, as when the HOV lane was put in, the streetlights finally were added. 2) Why doesn't the Van Wyck have a rapid transit line going down the center? Its amazing how New York City has no direct transit connection to its International Airport. I don't count the Airtrain, because once again it was a case of shove it down their throats by a modern day Moses, the lawless and unaccountable to anybody Port Authority. The real horror story in that is that the IN USE, and BUILT LIRR Rockaway line. In 1962, the line was still active, and Idlewild (JFK) Airport was there. Airline travel was in it's infancy, but how in 1962, they allowed an IN USE line to be abandoned, right next to the airport is incorrigable. 3) Why isn't there a transit line on the Whitestone Bridge? Transit was not popular by the time that bridge was built. The TA was abandoning lines back then, unfortunately not building them. 4) Weren't the Parkways built with low overpasses so buses couldn't bring the riff-raff to "his" beaches. Buses weren't at the point they are now in the 1930's in the infancy of the parkway system, and IINM, buses can physically ride to Jones beach on both the Wantagh way in, or the Robert Moses Causway. ) The jerk built more roads than anybody, but didn't learn to drive? What's wrong with this picture? Yes, roads and bridges that if we didn't have now, NYC and Long Island would have been crippled without. And these roads and bridges were being build ALL AROUND the country at the time. Other cities were also building roads instead of transit. It was the attitude of the time. You are again trying to take modern thought and attitude, and trying to fit it into the era of the 1930's-1960's. And whether he drove or not is irrelevant. 7) Just picture Manhattan with midtown and Lower Manhattan expressways. Picture them what? They weren't built. I'm not saying they should or should not have been built, but they aren't here. If they were underground through Manhattan (similar to Boston), it would probably be a good thing. It's all irrelevant though, as it doesn't exist either above or below Manhattan. 8) Remember in conclusion "they don't know what's good for them." And many people wanted cars. The whole country wanted the interstates. The whole country wanted bridges. This was NOT a New York phenomena. |
|
|
| (384581) | |
Re: A Transit Robert Moses Guy |
|
|
Posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Sat Feb 10 18:45:33 2007, in response to Re: A Transit Robert Moses Guy, posted by BrooklynBus on Sat Feb 10 18:18:40 2007. Picture Brooklyn without the Belt Parkway. Because of the Belt Parkway, I can get from Sheepshead Bay well into Nassau County or up to the Bronx by auto in the same amount of time it takes me to get to Park Slope during the evening rush hour, 45 minutes, (when the lights are timed for southbound traffic). Without the Belt Parkway, it would take me between 90 and 120 minutes to make that trip.Exactly. |
|
|
| (384582) | |
Re: A Transit Robert Moses Guy |
|
|
Posted by Jeff Rosen on Sat Feb 10 18:45:52 2007, in response to A Transit Robert Moses Guy, posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Fri Feb 9 14:16:58 2007. The problem with all the negative myths about Moses is that they all came from one source, The Power Broker by Robert Caro. It was Caro who wrote about the bridges being too low to not allow blacks on buses to the parks and Caro who calls Moses Jewish anti-Semite who denied his Jewish roots. Caro also devotes a whole chapter on how Moses stubbornly uprooted a whole neighborhood to build the X-Bronx Expressway. I read the book a few years ago for the second time, a long 1400 page book and it was obvious Caro had an extreme bias against Robert Moses. In other words all the negative myths can possibly be total B.S. |
|
|
| (384601) | |
Re: A Transit Robert Moses Guy |
|
|
Posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Sat Feb 10 18:57:26 2007, in response to Re: A Transit Robert Moses Guy, posted by Robert From Queens on Sat Feb 10 18:33:04 2007. You're right - In a way its good Moses built what he did, because today nothing can be built, and it isn't just from a $ point of view. The whole process is too complicated. I can't imagine two bridges being built within sight of each other, i.e. the Whitestone and Throgs Neck.And that's all I am trying to say. NYC and it's suburbs would have been able to become the city it is today without the roads and bridges that were built in that era. You also have to remember this is NOT unique to NY. Most cities were not building transit in that era, and only building roads and bridges. That was the era they were in, just as 50 or 100 years earlier, every city was building railroads and transit. Just look at a city like Los Angeles became a city in that era. It was not a real city when the subways were being built around the country. It really developed in the 1920's and later....so look what era that was....the 1930's to 1950's....RM's height era. So they didn't build subways either....they lined the city with freeways. This is what ALL the cities were doing. None of them for the most part were expanding transit. They were all ripping up their trolley systems. Robert Moses fought for the federal money that was needed for these projects. He was in competition with other cities doing the same thing around the counry. So DON'T think it's so simple to say that if he didn't take the money for the Whitestone bridge or the Cross Island Parkway that they would have used that money for let's say the 2nd Ave subway instead.... NO...that money would have went to let's say Cleveland instead for their road project...and NY wouldn't have either the Whitestone bridge....OR....the 2nd Ave subway. This money would have went somewhere, and RM brought it to NY. Other cities around the counrty were trying to get the same money. Again, people are using CURRENT thought about transit and roads, and trying to translate that into 1930's-1960's thought about transit and roads. |
|
|
| (384604) | |
Typo Re: A Transit Robert Moses Guy |
|
|
Posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Sat Feb 10 18:58:32 2007, in response to Re: A Transit Robert Moses Guy, posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Sat Feb 10 18:57:26 2007. NYC and it's suburbs would have been able to become the city it is today without the roads and bridges that were built in that era.That was supposed to say WOULD NOT HAVE become the city it is today.... |
|
|
| (384605) | |
Re: A Transit Robert Moses Guy |
|
|
Posted by Jeff Rosen on Sat Feb 10 18:58:40 2007, in response to Re: A Transit Robert Moses Guy, posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Sat Feb 10 18:41:27 2007. A few other pieces of trivia about Moses:
*SOURCE: The Power Broker by Robert Caro.
|
|
|
| (384607) | |
Re: A Transit Robert Moses Guy |
|
|
Posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Sat Feb 10 19:00:08 2007, in response to Re: A Transit Robert Moses Guy, posted by Jeff Rosen on Sat Feb 10 18:58:40 2007. Interesting!!I love how the signs on the Southern State say, "Hemp Lake State Park...." |
|
|
| (384610) | |
Re: A Transit Robert Moses Guy |
|
|
Posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Sat Feb 10 19:01:44 2007, in response to Re: A Transit Robert Moses Guy, posted by Jeff Rosen on Sat Feb 10 18:37:08 2007. ...And how would the rock stars take the Tour Buses to Jones Beach Theater! :) |
|
|
| (384612) | |
Re: A Transit Robert Moses Guy |
|
|
Posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Sat Feb 10 19:03:36 2007, in response to Re: A Transit Robert Moses Guy, posted by Robert From Queens on Sat Feb 10 18:34:55 2007. I am not "rationalizing". RM did some horrible things, but I also have to say, he did a lot of wonderful things too. You don't have to be either on the left or the right when it comes to RM, and that's all I am really trying to say......And to your Jonny Cochran and O.J. list....you can also add Robert Blake! :) |
|
|
| (384615) | |
Re: A Transit Robert Moses Guy |
|
|
Posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Sat Feb 10 19:07:20 2007, in response to Re: A Transit Robert Moses Guy, posted by Jeff Rosen on Sat Feb 10 18:45:52 2007. Right, and you can make someone look great or horrible by swaying or sckewing statistics or facts any way you want.People have to understand that you don't have to be on the left or right when it comes to RM. He did some bad things, but he did some wonderful things. It's not black or white, it "can" be gray or in the middle too. And buses weren't even as popular as they are now in the 1930's when many of these roads were being built. It probably wasn't even a thought or concern. |
|
|
| (384626) | |
Re: A Transit Robert Moses Guy |
|
|
Posted by Robert From Queens on Sat Feb 10 19:31:02 2007, in response to Re: A Transit Robert Moses Guy, posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Sat Feb 10 19:03:36 2007. Ok, agreed. I'm just not sure why he needed to do the horrible things - he could easily have been a hero otherwise. Why couldn't cars and mass transit co-exist? But then again, look at the prediction GM had for the city of the future - no sidewalks, just cars, cars, cars. How the mighty idiots in Detroit have fallen.Robert Blake - at least we can't blame Mark Fuhrman for this one, or that knucklhead Phil van Atter who put the vial of blood in his pocket. |
|
|
| (384628) | |
Re: A Transit Robert Moses Guy |
|
|
Posted by Robert From Queens on Sat Feb 10 19:33:33 2007, in response to Re: A Transit Robert Moses Guy, posted by Jeff Rosen on Sat Feb 10 18:45:52 2007. Good point about all the negative coming from one writer, Jeff.However, Mr. Caro does make many points that even Johnny Cochran would've had trouble twisting. |
|
|
| (384650) | |
Re: A Transit Robert Moses Guy |
|
|
Posted by Jeff Rosen on Sat Feb 10 21:09:30 2007, in response to Re: A Transit Robert Moses Guy, posted by Jeff Rosen on Sat Feb 10 18:58:40 2007. Another piece of RM trivia:He considered his biggest failure was the Bklyn Battery Tunnel. He had grandious plans for the Bklyn Battery Bridge!! Moses felt the massive bridge would be a tribute to himself, his masterpiece. You cannot get the same tribute from a tunnel as you cannot see a tunnel. Except for the approaches, a tunnel is invisible. In the Power Broker there is a drawn picture of his Brooklyn Battery Bridge plans. If I find the copy of my book I'll scan and post it. |
|
|
| (384658) | |
Re: A Transit Robert Moses Guy |
|
|
Posted by Olog-hai on Sat Feb 10 21:30:02 2007, in response to A Transit Robert Moses Guy, posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Fri Feb 9 14:16:58 2007. Regardless of whether we like him or not, a lot can be learned about getting public projects done....both good ways and bad ways from Robert MosesI disagree. Moses' only legacy was making NIMBYs more powerful. |
|
|
| (384659) | |
Re: A Transit Robert Moses Guy |
|
|
Posted by Dan Lawrence on Sat Feb 10 21:31:48 2007, in response to Re: A Transit Robert Moses Guy, posted by Mark Michalovic on Fri Feb 9 22:00:59 2007. Very true.Only now have the Counties that surround Baltimore City began to realize that they cannot survive without a vibrant city at the center and the City has begun to realize it cannot survive without the counties. It only took 80 years to happen. |
|
|
| (384663) | |
Re: A Transit Robert Moses Guy |
|
|
Posted by Olog-hai on Sat Feb 10 21:36:51 2007, in response to Re: A Transit Robert Moses Guy, posted by Mark Michalovic on Fri Feb 9 22:00:59 2007. It was people who wanted something rural and rugged who came to AmericaNot in all cases, nor in so many cases as to make such folk the majority; otherwise the cities would have died, versus prosper and expand vertically (something that the USA is famous for, long before the advent of people like Moses). The USA was not so isolationist as to eschew foreign trade . . . |
|
|
| (384666) | |
Re: A Transit Robert Moses Guy |
|
|
Posted by Olog-hai on Sat Feb 10 21:38:49 2007, in response to Re: A Transit Robert Moses Guy, posted by ntrainride on Fri Feb 9 17:56:37 2007. Fact is, anything that happened in the Bronx was not related to the construction of a six lane highwayThat's not a fact; that's an assertion. What do you have to support that assertion other than rhetoric? |
|
|
|
|
Page 1 of 9 |
|
