|
|
| Re: Brooklyn Dodgers (on topic) (464011) | |
 |
|
| Home > SubChat | |
[ Post a New Response | Return to the Index ]
|
Page 4 of 11 |
||
|
| (465720) | |
Re: Brooklyn Dodgers (on topic) |
|
|
Posted by BrooklynBus on Tue Jul 24 20:13:44 2007, in response to Re: Brooklyn Dodgers (on topic), posted by SelkirkTMO on Tue Jul 24 06:05:07 2007. I don't know how much Lindsay had to do with getting us air-conditioned subways (probably the single biggest improvement to the system, with florescent lighting, the second biggest in my opinion), but for the longest time the TA was deadset against it claiming it just wasn't feasible according to its engineers. When they finally conceded it was feasible for the IND-BMT, they still maintained for a number of years that it was infeasible for the IRT until they were proven wrong.Those too young will not remember this, but I do. So all you say is very true. Moses was evil in many ways, but he was also very brilliant as well as being a visionary, and caused a lot of good. No one who was in charge of transit came close to being a visionary and even without Moses being around would not have made vast improvements to the system. They were far more interested in political concerns and maintaining the status quo, afraid to do anything visionary or drastic except getting rid of streetcars and els and not replacing them with anything superior, just a lot of broken promises. I remember just before one of the last trolleys stopped operating (Church Avenue) , the posters said that starting the following week the line will be "improved" with bus service. Not only wasn't there an "improvement," we didn't even get new buses, just some old, noisy, rickety ones in need of a paint job that were in worse condition than the PCCs they replaced. And that's not revisionist history. |
|
|
| (465722) | |
Housing Projects Re: Jane Jacobs Re: Cross Manhattan expressway |
|
|
Posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Tue Jul 24 20:22:09 2007, in response to Re: Jane Jacobs Re: Cross Manhattan expressway, posted by BrooklynBus on Tue Jul 24 15:44:10 2007. I agree, projects sucked big time, and was a huge mistake, but take a look at how a lot of these people were living back then. While yes, the neighborhoods were still somewhat strong, the housing stock was deteriorating to epic proportions. Many of these buildings taken down were still old law tenaments, which lacked central heating, had kitchens from the 1800's, and many tenants had to share hallway bathrooms. Something HAD to be done, as the conditions were getting worse, and these buildings needed MAJOR upgrading. And again, this was the 1940's and 50's, when cities were looked at as old fashioned, and there was an "out with the old, in with the new " attitude that was everywhere. Today, we know better with our "everything old is new again" attitude, and we know preservation is a good thing, and people actually look for "old" now. But that was NOT the case in the 40's, 50's, and even the 60's....again, we can't take today's ideals, and place them in a different era with different thinking.The below link to the housing authority's archives is a sobering look at how people were living, and shows both the good and bad of clearing neighborhoods for project-like housing. But again, remember the era....it was an out with the old in with the new mentality, you can't place today's better, what is old is new again attitude in restoration and preservation. The site does look at both the good and the bad. Please read some of the stuff on this site, and look at the photos and their captions....and see how many of these people lived in many of these buildings, below the link, is some sample photos. Also notice where the bathtubs are, as they didn't have bathrooms! http://www.laguardiawagnerarchive.lagcc.cuny.edu/PhotosVirtualExhibit/ShowPhotosDetails.asp?photo=02.003.22199&ShowPage=6&PhotoID=774  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.) ID# 02.003.22199  "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  Mrs. Theodore Wurthmann poses in the kitchen of her tenement apartment, probably in Bedford-Stuyvesant, Brooklyn, September 2, 1941. The Wurthmann family were about to move out of their slum and into the newly opened Kingsborough Houses in Bedford-Stuyvesant, Brooklyn. ID# 02.003.00107  A woman poses with her children in the kitchen of their tenement apartment in Brooklyn, near the Navy Yard, 02/27/1948. Their building would be torn down as part of the site clearance for Farragut Houses, a 16.6 acre complex that opened in 1952 and houses some 3,440 residents. ID# 02.003.07854  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. ID# 02.002.01796  The back of tenement buildings, in a photo taken September 24, 1941, which would be razed to build Amsterdam Houses in 1948, bounded by West 61st and West 64th Streets, from Amsterdam Avenue to West End Avenue in Manhattan. ID# 02.003.00958 |
|
|
| (465723) | |
Re: Brooklyn Dodgers (on topic) |
|
|
Posted by E Line Fan on Tue Jul 24 20:23:28 2007, in response to Re: Brooklyn Dodgers (on topic), posted by BrooklynBus on Tue Jul 24 20:13:44 2007. PATH led the way and the NYCTA went back to work. This time air conditioning was a success in the R38s. |
|
|
(Sponsored) |
iPhone 6 (4.7 Inch) Premium PU Leather Wallet Case - Red w/ Floral Interior - by Notch-It |
|
| (465727) | |
Re: Brooklyn Dodgers (on topic) |
|
|
Posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Tue Jul 24 20:28:51 2007, in response to Re: Brooklyn Dodgers (on topic), posted by BrooklynBus on Tue Jul 24 19:25:12 2007. No, he figured out a way to get around those people, and it worked, and it went through right where he wanted it to, and there was nothing those people could do to stop it the way he did it. The end result was the same, he got around them, and pushed the road through, despite their objection (even if it doesn't have exits, entrances). |
|
|
| (465728) | |
Re: Brooklyn Dodgers (on topic) |
|
|
Posted by BrooklynBus on Tue Jul 24 20:31:03 2007, in response to Re: Brooklyn Dodgers (on topic), posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Tue Jul 24 19:24:00 2007. Not the reason the overpasses were built too low for buses.See this post. |
|
|
| (465730) | |
Re: Housing Projects Re: Jane Jacobs Re: Cross Manhattan expressway |
|
|
Posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Tue Jul 24 20:31:28 2007, in response to Housing Projects Re: Jane Jacobs Re: Cross Manhattan expressway, posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Tue Jul 24 20:22:09 2007. The Title I housing program probably seemed like a good idea at the time. Unfortunatley these housing projects created new problems at the same time they solved existing ones. |
|
|
| (465731) | |
Re: Brooklyn Dodgers (on topic) |
|
|
Posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Tue Jul 24 20:31:29 2007, in response to Re: Brooklyn Dodgers (on topic), posted by BrooklynBus on Tue Jul 24 20:13:44 2007. When they finally conceded it was feasible for the IND-BMT, they still maintained for a number of years that it was infeasible for the IRT until they were proven wrong.New technology allowed it. remember just before one of the last trolleys stopped operating (Church Avenue) , the posters said that starting the following week the line will be "improved" with bus service. Not only wasn't there an "improvement," we didn't even get new buses, just some old, noisy, rickety ones in need of a paint job that were in worse condition than the PCCs they replaced. Yes, it is a travesty all around the country, but that had to do more with FORD I believe or General Motors in the fiasco of replacing streetcars with rubber tired buses. |
|
|
| (465732) | |
Re: Housing Projects Re: Jane Jacobs Re: Cross Manhattan expressway |
|
|
Posted by Jackson Park B Train on Tue Jul 24 20:33:50 2007, in response to Housing Projects Re: Jane Jacobs Re: Cross Manhattan expressway, posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Tue Jul 24 20:22:09 2007. tub in kitchen yup! I lived in one of those on 11th between B and C 66-67. The toilet had been annexed to the "bedroom" otherwise not much change did have radiator/central heat. When I lived there I was a 14th St line rider. |
|
|
| (465733) | |
Re: Brooklyn Dodgers (on topic) |
|
|
Posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Tue Jul 24 20:34:23 2007, in response to Re: Brooklyn Dodgers (on topic), posted by BrooklynBus on Tue Jul 24 19:45:00 2007. lavish box seats at his Jones Beach Theater which he expressly built for that purpose.Thank goodness for that place, it's one of the BEST places to see a concert. While it's not used for shows anymore, it's concert use is one of the premier places in the country to see a concert. I can't even count how many times I have been there since a teenager to see a concert, but it's got to be close to 40 or 50 at this point. |
|
|
| (465735) | |
Re: Brooklyn Dodgers (on topic) |
|
|
Posted by BrooklynBus on Tue Jul 24 20:35:02 2007, in response to Re: Brooklyn Dodgers (on topic), posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Mon Jul 23 14:58:31 2007. You don't believe that Moses was difficult to deal with? |
|
|
| (465736) | |
Re: Brooklyn Dodgers (on topic) |
|
|
Posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Tue Jul 24 20:36:07 2007, in response to Re: Brooklyn Dodgers (on topic), posted by BrooklynBus on Tue Jul 24 20:35:02 2007. No, that I know... But this Giants and Dodgers thing is ridiculous. |
|
|
| (465738) | |
Re: Housing Projects Re: Jane Jacobs Re: Cross Manhattan expressway |
|
|
Posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Tue Jul 24 20:37:39 2007, in response to Re: Housing Projects Re: Jane Jacobs Re: Cross Manhattan expressway, posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Tue Jul 24 20:31:28 2007. Yes, I completely agree. |
|
|
| (465739) | |
Re: Brooklyn Dodgers (on topic) |
|
|
Posted by SelkirkTMO on Tue Jul 24 20:39:03 2007, in response to Re: Brooklyn Dodgers (on topic), posted by BrooklynBus on Tue Jul 24 20:13:44 2007. Lindsay made it a campaign issue and pushed for the first air conditioned cars as part of the R38 order which was still in the works, and made it policy (followed by MTA) that all new car purchases thereafter HAD to be air conditioned. It was a real big deal at the time. |
|
|
| (465743) | |
Re: Jane Jacobs Re: Cross Manhattan expressway |
|
|
Posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Tue Jul 24 20:41:20 2007, in response to Re: Jane Jacobs Re: Cross Manhattan expressway, posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Tue Jul 24 11:15:50 2007. For the record, see nycroads.com, for more unbuilt roads, which is a great site.Moses also had plans for a lower Manhattan Expressway (Canal Street area connecting Holland Tunnel to Brooklyn), Mid Manhattan Expressway (Connecting Lincoln Tunnel to Queens Midtown Tunnel) and Upper Manhattan Expressway connecting George Washington bridge to The Bronx (without city streets), and see the housing projects post for the type of neighborhoods these were to go through. Do not compare those neighborhoods to what they look like and cost today..... (So I don't want to hear the "Oh, it's rich neighborhoods" excuse, as they were slums in those areas just like in Brooklyn, Bronx, too at that time). |
|
|
| (465747) | |
Re: Brooklyn Dodgers (on topic) |
|
|
Posted by E Line Fan on Tue Jul 24 20:44:24 2007, in response to Re: Brooklyn Dodgers (on topic), posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Tue Jul 24 19:28:41 2007. Suffolk is having a similar growth as Nassau though there still are places like Center Moriches. From Brentwood it's a nice ride especially as one nears Wading River Road. Sometimes we go LIE and come back Sunrise but once in a while we'll reverse it. |
|
|
| (465749) | |
Re: Brooklyn Dodgers (on topic) |
|
|
Posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Tue Jul 24 20:48:14 2007, in response to Re: Brooklyn Dodgers (on topic), posted by E Line Fan on Tue Jul 24 20:44:24 2007. Center Moriches is currently the "Suburban-Rural" line, with Center moriches' downtown still feeling like a rural downtown. Unfortunately, that line moves further east each year, it's currently really trying to jump forward to Riverhead, but I would still give the cut off at Center Moriches on the South Shore, and Wading River on the North Shore as the current "Rural-Suburban" line....but unfortunately, it's bowing eastward, as Riverhead is currently suburbanizng fast. |
|
|
| (465753) | |
Re: Brooklyn Dodgers (on topic) |
|
|
Posted by E Line Fan on Tue Jul 24 20:51:15 2007, in response to Re: Brooklyn Dodgers (on topic), posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Tue Jul 24 19:22:45 2007. Whatever became of the plan for a highway that would've connected the Lincoln and the Queens Midtown Tunnels along either 37th or 38th Street? |
|
|
| (465754) | |
Re: Housing Projects Re: Jane Jacobs Re: Cross Manhattan expressway |
|
|
Posted by BrooklynBus on Tue Jul 24 20:51:35 2007, in response to Housing Projects Re: Jane Jacobs Re: Cross Manhattan expressway, posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Tue Jul 24 20:22:09 2007. I agree with you as to the difference in thinking then and now.I've also been to the tenement museum on the Lower East Side. No pictures can do justice to the horrors of living as well as working in one of these buildings, therefore spending 16 hours or more a day in them. After you realize this, you get even more respect for the vast number of inner city parks that Moses built that allowed these people to escape from their prisons. That said, I wonder in fact how many of the buildings Moses took down for the CBEx was in fact old-law tenements, and how much of it was fully functional housing. My aunt lived in the Tremont section of the Bronx and we would visit her every six months. One day she was living on the sixth floor in the middle of the block line with 6 story apartment houses on both sides of the street. All the buildings were built in the 1920s and were only 40 years old at the time. One day she is living at the end of the block and there was something funny about her living room like it had been hit by an earthquake. Whenever I put my drink down on the table, it slid to the other end. My father asked her if the building was safe. I asked her what happened to all the other buildings. She said they were torn down to make way for a highway. It wasn't until I read the Power Broker that I realized that her building like many others still standing, were severely damaged by the blasting of the CBEx. While considered safe to live in, hoe would you like to be walking up a hill to go from the living room to the kitchen all day long? I also doubt that any of these landlords were compensated for the damage lowering their property values. So while the tenement argument sounds good, it falls apart unless you can prove that most of the housing taken down was indeed obsolete. I doubt this to be the case. |
|
|
| (465758) | |
Re: Brooklyn Dodgers (on topic) |
|
|
Posted by WillD on Tue Jul 24 21:06:44 2007, in response to Re: Brooklyn Dodgers (on topic), posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Tue Jul 24 19:22:45 2007. Even Mr Roebling must have been flying high at "his" bridge.Except that he died before it reached even a fraction of its immense bulk. |
|
|
| (465759) | |
Re: Housing Projects Re: Jane Jacobs Re: Cross Manhattan expressway |
|
|
Posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Tue Jul 24 21:07:02 2007, in response to Re: Housing Projects Re: Jane Jacobs Re: Cross Manhattan expressway, posted by BrooklynBus on Tue Jul 24 20:51:35 2007. Yes, I agree that it wasn't only "slums" that were taken down. there obviously were good buildings, as well as bad buildings in the path of the roads, or in the path of clearing for projects. I was responding to the "took people out of functioning housing, and put them in projects" part of the comment. I was trying to show that while now we can see the ill effects of housing projects and bulldozing of neighborhoods, even if bad housing was originally well intentioned. Through time, and learning we have learned better ways, but at the time, not only was it a different thought, there were also a lot of buildings in need of upgrading out there, in all the boroughs. |
|
|
| (465762) | |
Re: Brooklyn Dodgers (on topic) |
|
|
Posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Tue Jul 24 21:13:40 2007, in response to Re: Brooklyn Dodgers (on topic), posted by E Line Fan on Tue Jul 24 20:51:15 2007. It was knocked down. And remember, these were not to go through the "current neighborhoods" as they are and look today. Many of the homes looked like what is in that Housing Project post link. It's not the "rich" manhattanites of today in those neighborhoods that fought off the onslaught through Manhattan. |
|
|
| (465764) | |
Re: Brooklyn Dodgers (on topic) |
|
|
Posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Tue Jul 24 21:15:05 2007, in response to Re: Brooklyn Dodgers (on topic), posted by WillD on Tue Jul 24 21:06:44 2007. I know, that's a shame....he would have been proud....But the point is, look back at many of the bridge designers....they all had egos at the sight of their "works of art", many of which are. |
|
|
| (465765) | |
Re: Brooklyn Dodgers (on topic) |
|
|
Posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Tue Jul 24 21:20:05 2007, in response to Re: Brooklyn Dodgers (on topic), posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Tue Jul 24 21:15:05 2007. To put into perspective, we wouldn't sit in awe of the "Golden Gate Tunnel", or the "Verrazano Tunnel", the "George Washington Tunnel", in the same way we look at their actual as built bridges, where the sight almost brings tears to your eyes in awe of many of them...even the ugly duckling Williamsburg Bridge is beautiful in it's own industrial era simplicity....And while newer bridges lack a bit of the speaking to soul architecture (such as the Verazanno, Whitestone, etc), of course they were built in a later age when simplicty archictecture was more the norm (think of 1940's, 50's, and 60's buldings compared to their earlier decades counterparts), the sheer sight and size of a bridge, does in fact provoke a human awe, way more than a tunnel does (even if probably technology and workwise, a tunnel is probably a lot more intricate). |
|
|
| (465770) | |
Re: Jane Jacobs Re: Cross Manhattan expressway |
|
|
Posted by DCmetrogreen on Tue Jul 24 21:31:13 2007, in response to Re: Jane Jacobs Re: Cross Manhattan expressway, posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Tue Jul 24 20:41:20 2007. There is a great Google Mashup map of these roads and others on Vanshnookeraggen's site. |
|
|
| (465776) | |
Re: Jane Jacobs Re: Cross Manhattan expressway |
|
|
Posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Tue Jul 24 21:39:56 2007, in response to Re: Jane Jacobs Re: Cross Manhattan expressway, posted by DCmetrogreen on Tue Jul 24 21:31:13 2007. Cool! What is the address? |
|
|
| (465780) | |
Re: Brooklyn Dodgers (on topic) |
|
|
Posted by WillD on Tue Jul 24 21:45:00 2007, in response to Re: Brooklyn Dodgers (on topic), posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Tue Jul 24 19:36:24 2007. we are an island in Manhattan, and on Long Island, there is only one way in and out by rail,But that could have changed if the Joint bond plan of 1955 had allocated some of the PANJNY and TBTA's nearly 3 billion dollar windfall toward mass transit as opposed to superflous highways. The road crossings still could have been built, and a few neccesary highways constructed, but we could have had two more tunnels under the Hudson, another pair of LIRR tunnels under the East River, extensive subway improvements, and probably could have built the freight tunnel under NY Harbor. Instead Moses pumped that money into a great number of superflous highways that in some cases followed his previous roads and still did nothing to alleviate traffic. I'm not the one who came up with this idea, it's straight from the MRTC's reports which were issued at the same time Moses was readying the spending plan for that bond package. Of course it does, but once again, you are using TODAY's ideals and knowledge, and learning, and trying to place it in an era that looked at rail (any rail) as old fashioned. No. You're applying Moses and his buddy's thinking to everyone at the time, which clearly is not the case. People like F. Dodd McHugh, Jane Jacobs, Lee Koppelman, and the MRTC were contemporaries of Moses who realized the utility of rail travel, they saw the good that could come from mixed income organic neighborhoods, and they pushed for a balanced modal mix which emphasised both rail and road development. Moses would have none of it and instead pushed for more extensive road construction even after it was apparant the previous roads had done nothing to relieve congestion. A large minority of people saw how things could change for the better to make inroads at fixing NYC's traffic problems, but they were powerless in the face of Moses. People used the LIRR in the bottom of it's ebb in the late 1960s, so clearly they were willing to seek alternatives to the Moses-induced traffic, they just weren't provided with anything other than a railroad choked of all funding for nearly two decades. |
|
|
| (465797) | |
Re: Housing Projects Re: Jane Jacobs Re: Cross Manhattan expressway |
|
|
Posted by BrooklynBus on Tue Jul 24 22:10:45 2007, in response to Re: Housing Projects Re: Jane Jacobs Re: Cross Manhattan expressway, posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Tue Jul 24 21:07:02 2007. Through time, and learning we have learned better waysAnd you can thank Jane Jacobs for that. Her book "The Death and Life of Great American Cities" (which I thought wasn't nearly as well written as the Power Broker) was mostly responsible for the change in thinking that Projects were nothing more than vertical slums that replaced horizontal slums. The thinking before Jacobs was that the increased light and air that the projects afforded would remove the slums. Jacobs wrote about the importance of neighborhoods and sidewalks and sidewalk activity and its relation to crime which no one ever even thought about before her and that it would take more than more light and air and parks to remove the slums and the crime. |
|
|
| (465802) | |
Re: Housing Projects Re: Jane Jacobs Re: Cross Manhattan expressway |
|
|
Posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Tue Jul 24 22:19:40 2007, in response to Re: Housing Projects Re: Jane Jacobs Re: Cross Manhattan expressway, posted by BrooklynBus on Tue Jul 24 22:10:45 2007. Sounds like a very interesting book, I will have to see if I can get a copy. On a similar topic, did you ever read Jacob Riis, "How the other Half Lives"? It's more about the late 1880's and 1890's, and the slums of the old law tenaments of the Lower East Side, and Lower Manhattan, but it's very interesting, and I think what led to the passing of the "New Law Tenaments" laws, that housing after either 1890 or 1900 had to uphold. Most buildings then had to have a window in every room (or at least bedrooms), airshafts, etc. |
|
|
| (465803) | |
Re: Jane Jacobs Re: Cross Manhattan expressway |
|
|
Posted by BrooklynBus on Tue Jul 24 22:25:58 2007, in response to Re: Jane Jacobs Re: Cross Manhattan expressway, posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Tue Jul 24 20:41:20 2007. I always thought that the LOMEX and Mid-Manhattan Expressways were bad ideas, but after seeing the models at the Museum of the City of New York at the Moses exhibit a few months ago, I'm not so sure. I didn't know that the LOMEX was proposed to be five lanes in each direction. I just assumed 3 lanes in each direction like NYC's most other highways. With ten lanes, it might have worked. Also, originally proposed as an elevated higheay which raised much objections, the final proposal I believe was to have the highway sunken in an open cut. Yes there would have been much demolition and many cast iron buildings would have been lost, but plenty would have also remained. And yes the area has since been revitalized, but that would have happened anyway, even if the highway would have been built and we wouldn't have the chronically congested Canal Street we have today.Also, the mid-Manhattan Expressway also would have necessitated much demolition, but there were no skyscrapers in its path, just mostly small buildings and a few mid-size buildings. What I didn't know is that although it would have been an elevated highway, the model showed that it would occupy the second story of skyscrapers built above it. The whole area would have been redeveloped, and wouldn't it have made sense to connect the Lincoln and Midtown Tunnels? Maybe if these were built there wouldn't be any need to discuss congestion pricing today. |
|
|
| (465804) | |
Re: Brooklyn Dodgers (on topic) |
|
|
Posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Tue Jul 24 22:30:39 2007, in response to Re: Brooklyn Dodgers (on topic), posted by WillD on Tue Jul 24 21:45:00 2007. A large minority of people saw how things could change for the better to make inroads at fixing NYC's traffic problems, but they were powerless in the face of Moses.Agreed, but that was the case unfortunately just about everywhere, not just NY. People used the LIRR in the bottom of it's ebb in the late 1960s, Yes, just as they do today. But many of the people on the highways/parkways have no choice. The majority of people destined for places the LIRR goes to (such as Manhattan, and other areas where the LIRR conveniently stops), will use the LIRR instead of their cars. However, the LIRR doesn't, and couldn't possibly go from every home to every workplace conveniently or efficiently, those people must use their cars, and the highway/road system. |
|
|
| (465806) | |
Re: Brooklyn Dodgers (on topic) |
|
|
Posted by BrooklynBus on Tue Jul 24 22:36:10 2007, in response to Re: Brooklyn Dodgers (on topic), posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Tue Jul 24 19:10:21 2007. I don't agree that the Bronx was in trouble before that. Although I lived in Brooklyn, I had five aunts all living in the Bronx and frequently made subway trips to visit them. That was prior to 1962 and there was no deterioration anywhere in the Bronx that I remember. Maybe some of the housing was substandard, but it was a thriving borough.The blight that beset the Bronx seemed to occur almost overnight. Although I can't say for sure that other factors were not at play, and can't say for sure how much of a factor the XBronx was, it was definitely not in trouble before. Another aunt lived on 173rd Street near Vyse Avenue, not in the highway's path, but not that far away either. One day the neighborhood was fine, then we came back six months later and 50% of the buildings were abandoned or demolished. And the neighborhood was exclusively five story walk ups or six story apartment buildings. |
|
|
| (465808) | |
Re: Jane Jacobs Re: Cross Manhattan expressway |
|
|
Posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Tue Jul 24 22:37:39 2007, in response to Re: Jane Jacobs Re: Cross Manhattan expressway, posted by BrooklynBus on Tue Jul 24 22:25:58 2007. Also, originally proposed as an elevated higheay which raised much objections, the final proposal I believe was to have the highway sunken in an open cut.Yes, I agree probably....with the open cut. perhaps, a double stacked highway, in the cut, so only half the ROW would be needed. Yes, a lot of old (and at the time crappy) buildings would have been lost, and lost to the great renovation they eventually recieved), but with a cut, they may have even been able to cover over it, and rebuild on top, and Manhattan being what it is, would have had some expensive real estate on top by now, and the nightmare that is Canal St with all that unnecessary through traffic on the surface of local roads, would all be hidden in the highway in the cut or perhaps even underground by now (think Park Ave Metro North cut, now tunnel). Also, the mid-Manhattan Expressway also would have necessitated much demolition, but there were no skyscrapers in its path, just mostly small buildings and a few mid-size buildings. And many of those buildings there were torn down and replaced at this point anyway.....and yes, it would have made sense to connect the Midtown and Lincoln tunnels, and that was the original idea....and why the LIE has the I495 designation. It would have taken a lot of through traffic (that Manhattan doesn't need) off the local roads. |
|
|
| (465809) | |
Re: Brooklyn Dodgers (on topic) |
|
|
Posted by SelkirkTMO on Tue Jul 24 22:38:54 2007, in response to Re: Brooklyn Dodgers (on topic), posted by BrooklynBus on Tue Jul 24 22:36:10 2007. I can tell you the exact trigger point of the Bronx going to chit ... wasn't so much the Cross Bronx (that was the final insult) ... it was the building of CO-OP CITY and a large portion of the populace of the south Bronx relocating to there, and those who couldn't afford to buy in inherited the remains. With so many vacant apartments, the south Bronx went straight into the dumper. |
|
|
| (465810) | |
Re: Brooklyn Dodgers (on topic) |
|
|
Posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Tue Jul 24 22:42:47 2007, in response to Re: Brooklyn Dodgers (on topic), posted by BrooklynBus on Tue Jul 24 22:36:10 2007. Remember, there were MANY factors involved here, not just the "cross Bronx". You had a stead exodus of people from the "city" to the suburbs, people looked at the city as old fashioned. The Bronx would have fallen anyway, you can't blame it all on the Cross Bronx (although granted, while I don't believe it caused the exodus, it probably didn't help it, but it would have fallen anyway).Again, I point you to other parts of the Bronx, and to Bushwick, Bedford Stuyvesant, East New York, Brownsville, and the list goes on....most of which were stable great neighborhoods right through the 50's also....and they all fell too (and hard), just like the Bronx, and none of them had an expressway blasted through their neighborhoods..... |
|
|
| (465811) | |
Re: Brooklyn Dodgers (on topic) |
|
|
Posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Tue Jul 24 22:46:15 2007, in response to Re: Brooklyn Dodgers (on topic), posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Tue Jul 24 22:42:47 2007. By the way, I just want to thank you BrooklynBus for your great comments, and informative posts. This thread has been extremely interesting, and educational....I know we always seem to appear to "go at it" every time this topic comes up, but I always respect what you come up with (even if I don't completely agree with it all)....it's an interesting and educational debate here. |
|
|
| (465813) | |
Re: Brooklyn Dodgers (on topic) |
|
|
Posted by ntrainride on Tue Jul 24 22:47:51 2007, in response to Re: Brooklyn Dodgers (on topic), posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Tue Jul 24 21:13:40 2007. Dude, give it up. Most people just don't have the ability to separate what the current environment is from a what the current environment was, say, 50 or 100 years ago. The old "the world only started when I gained self-awareness" p.o.v. Face it, we're all freekin' spoiled beyond the dreams of ancient kings or whatever. Just one look at those photos you posted (...and, hmmm, mighty curious as to who is in those photos, ain't it?) shows that, well, todays slums ain't nothing compared to what many of our ancestors came from.You lived like that, best believe a brand new "tower" filled with spanking clean rooms and modern conveniences and good bathrooms is gonna look like paradise. Even today, there's no excuse AT ALL for folks `effin' up where they live just because it's a "project". To my admittedly limited experience it sure seems like the condition of a neighborhood is totally dependent on the behavior of the residents. Go check out the Taylor-Wythe Houses in Williamsburg, then walk down Lee Avenue to the Marcy Houses for proof. That's why remnants of past urban infrastructures are so damn good to have around. Un-alterable proof of what was "normal" in different times. |
|
|
| (465815) | |
Re: Jane Jacobs Re: Cross Manhattan expressway |
|
|
Posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Tue Jul 24 22:51:06 2007, in response to Re: Jane Jacobs Re: Cross Manhattan expressway, posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Tue Jul 24 22:37:39 2007. And many of those buildings there were torn down and replaced at this point anyway.....and yes, it would have made sense to connect the Midtown and Lincoln tunnels, and that was the original idea....and why the LIE has the I495 designation. It would have taken a lot of through traffic (that Manhattan doesn't need) off the local roads. This could still be done by drilling a deep-bore tunnel between the two. The cross traffic would never see the light of day in Manhattan. Of course, the cost would be monstrously prohibitive. |
|
|
| (465819) | |
Re: Brooklyn Dodgers (on topic) |
|
|
Posted by BrooklynBus on Tue Jul 24 22:54:03 2007, in response to Re: Brooklyn Dodgers (on topic), posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Tue Jul 24 19:18:25 2007. Everything else that he did not control suffered during his years. (Comment also referred to hospitals and schools.)Then there should have been someone put to run transit expansion... In theory yes, but practically no. When you have someone as powerful as Moses who would ruin your career if you dared to stand up to him you couldn't advocate for transit, or hospitals or schools or anything else. Look what he did to his own brother, a competent engineer just like Moses, but Moses made sure he wouldn't be able to get a job in the NY area because he didn't want the competition, and his brother had too much pride to move to another part of the country where he could have accomplished as much as his brother, according to Caro's conjecture. (No one even knew that he had a brother when he was alive.) The only reason that Jane Jacobs could stand up to him is that she didn't have a career to lose. She was just a housewife with alot of nerve who decided to put her thoughts in writing winning the respect of urban planners across the country although she wasn't even one of them. Your point about the Rockaway Line is well-taken. Yes, it could have been used and should have been, and still should be, but there was no one to advocate for it. But if Moses believed in transit, he could have, and it would have been done. It also does not absolve him from prohibiting transit along highway medians. |
|
|
| (465823) | |
Re: Brooklyn Dodgers (on topic) |
|
|
Posted by BrooklynBus on Tue Jul 24 22:59:39 2007, in response to Re: Brooklyn Dodgers (on topic), posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Tue Jul 24 19:22:45 2007. And your point about the Underground tunnels being valuable links is...?I don't know how high Mr. Roebling was "flying" since he didn't even live to see the bridge's completion. Yes, I mean Flushing Meadows Park, the one that Moses built that would still be a garbage dump. The same park he wanted to be named after himself. |
|
|
| (465826) | |
Re: Brooklyn Dodgers (on topic) |
|
|
Posted by BrooklynBus on Tue Jul 24 23:05:33 2007, in response to Re: Brooklyn Dodgers (on topic), posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Tue Jul 24 21:13:40 2007. It wasn't 37th and 38th. It was in the low 30s, like 32 to 33rd.See my other post on the Mid-Manhattan Expressway. |
|
|
| (465835) | |
Re: Housing Projects Re: Jane Jacobs Re: Cross Manhattan expressway |
|
|
Posted by BrooklynBus on Tue Jul 24 23:13:07 2007, in response to Re: Housing Projects Re: Jane Jacobs Re: Cross Manhattan expressway, posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Tue Jul 24 22:19:40 2007. I heard of the Riis Book, but never read it. If you haven't been to the Lower East Side Tenement Museum. I would recommend it to you. I still think, until you are inside one of them and hear the stories of the guides, you can't really understand what it was like no matter how many pictures you've seen. I thought the four room apartment I grew up in that was built in the 1920's was cramped. It was a "palace" compared to the old-law tenements. |
|
|
| (465839) | |
Re: Jane Jacobs Re: Cross Manhattan expressway |
|
|
Posted by BrooklynBus on Tue Jul 24 23:16:42 2007, in response to Re: Jane Jacobs Re: Cross Manhattan expressway, posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Tue Jul 24 22:37:39 2007. For a long time much of the LIE had a State 495 designation. It wasn't always entirely I-495. |
|
|
| (465840) | |
Re: Jane Jacobs Re: Cross Manhattan expressway |
|
|
Posted by BrooklynBus on Tue Jul 24 23:17:38 2007, in response to Re: Jane Jacobs Re: Cross Manhattan expressway, posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Tue Jul 24 22:51:06 2007. Moses would have found the money somehow. |
|
|
| (465845) | |
Re: Brooklyn Dodgers (on topic) |
|
|
Posted by BrooklynBus on Tue Jul 24 23:24:21 2007, in response to Re: Brooklyn Dodgers (on topic), posted by SelkirkTMO on Tue Jul 24 22:38:54 2007. A similar point could be made about Downtown Brooklyn, once consisting of high-end stores. Then in 1971, Kings Plaza was built. Malls were the in-thing and no one wanted to shop on "main street" anymore. Many shoppers no longer wanted to travel to Downtown Brooklyn and many of the high end stores were replaced with shlock stores. Middle and Upper class don't shop in shlock stores, so the clientele of the neighborhood declines. Even with the building of Fulton Mall and Metro-Tech, Fulton Street still looks like crap. |
|
|
| (465846) | |
Re: Brooklyn Dodgers (on topic) |
|
|
Posted by BrooklynBus on Tue Jul 24 23:26:34 2007, in response to Re: Brooklyn Dodgers (on topic), posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Tue Jul 24 22:42:47 2007. And you can go further than New York. Atlantic City was vibrant in the 1950s and early 60's and also fell in a few short years in the mid-sixties. |
|
|
| (465847) | |
Re: Housing Projects Re: Jane Jacobs Re: Cross Manhattan expressway |
|
|
Posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Tue Jul 24 23:28:15 2007, in response to Re: Housing Projects Re: Jane Jacobs Re: Cross Manhattan expressway, posted by BrooklynBus on Tue Jul 24 23:13:07 2007. I didn't know they had such a thing! Where is it, I think I would like to see it....it's probably the same stuff that's in the Riis book |
|
|
| (465849) | |
Re: Jane Jacobs Re: Cross Manhattan expressway |
|
|
Posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Tue Jul 24 23:28:51 2007, in response to Re: Jane Jacobs Re: Cross Manhattan expressway, posted by BrooklynBus on Tue Jul 24 23:17:38 2007. Yup. |
|
|
| (465851) | |
Re: Brooklyn Dodgers (on topic) |
|
|
Posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Tue Jul 24 23:33:24 2007, in response to Re: Brooklyn Dodgers (on topic), posted by BrooklynBus on Tue Jul 24 23:24:21 2007. Yeah, I went to school on Jay Street back in the late 80's for two years...and would often go to Fulton St to kill some time when I had a large gap between classes, and it was a real hass been place. It was just before MetroTech was built. Myrtle Ave still cut through to Jay, and there was an old building (block of buildings), on the corner of Jay and Myrtle where I would get coffee, and an egg sandwich sometimes for breakfast after getting out of the Jay St subway station. In my time there, the deli closed, and of course I watched as the hole block of (old law tenemants by the way) came down for Metro Tech....I went back some years later and couldnt believe how the area there changed. Anyway, Fulton St was pretty crappy back then, very has been look. Although the old A&S store was like a timewarp (now Macy's). Great old escalators, and manual elevators with an operator that would announce what was on each floor.... |
|
|
| (465852) | |
Re: Brooklyn Dodgers (on topic) |
|
|
Posted by E Line Fan on Tue Jul 24 23:34:05 2007, in response to Re: Brooklyn Dodgers (on topic), posted by BrooklynBus on Tue Jul 24 22:36:10 2007. A good picture of this is Report From Engine Company 82 by Dennis Smith. Good observations of the South Bronx by the retired NYFD Firefighter when he worked at the Intervale Avenue station in the late 60's and early 70's. Happily, this small but excellent book was reissued and is sometimes seen with Report From Ground Zero by the same author. It does for the fire department what Chief by Albert Seedman (Retired NYPD Chief Of Detectives) did for the police department when it was copyright 1974 - shows what it really is like. |
|
|
| (465853) | |
Re: Brooklyn Dodgers (on topic) |
|
|
Posted by SelkirkTMO on Tue Jul 24 23:36:11 2007, in response to Re: Brooklyn Dodgers (on topic), posted by BrooklynBus on Tue Jul 24 23:24:21 2007. The closing of the lower Myrtle (MJ) was also a major factor in the destruction of downtown Brooklyn. As was the case with the Third Avenue El in the Bronx in destroying "The Hub" as a shopping mecca for borough residents. There were a lot of things aside from the highways that contributed to the "malaise" of both boroughs. |
|
|
|
Page 4 of 11 |
||
