|
|
| Re: To el or not to el, that is the question! (75547) | |
 |
|
| Home > SubChat | |
[ Post a New Response | Return to the Index ]
[1 2] |
||
|
Page 2 of 2 |
||
|
| (76688) | |
Re: To el or not to el, that is the question! |
|
|
Posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Thu Apr 21 10:32:05 2005, in response to Re: To el or not to el, that is the question!, posted by #5 - Dyre Ave on Thu Apr 21 10:29:50 2005. That section runs along Van Sinderen Ave. |
|
|
| (76692) | |
Re: To el or not to el, that is the question! |
|
|
Posted by #5 - Dyre Ave on Thu Apr 21 10:35:06 2005, in response to Re: To el or not to el, that is the question!, posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Thu Apr 21 10:32:05 2005. Directly above Van Sinderen? I know there is one section of the L line where there is a set of freight tracks, so I wasn't sure if the L ran directly above Van Sinderen or beside it. |
|
|
| (76765) | |
Re: To el or not to el, that is the question! |
|
|
Posted by RIPTA42HopeTunnel on Thu Apr 21 12:20:06 2005, in response to Re: To el or not to el, that is the question!, posted by #5 - Dyre Ave on Thu Apr 21 10:35:06 2005. Directly above Van Sinderen? I know there is one section of the L line where there is a set of freight tracks, so I wasn't sure if the L ran directly above Van Sinderen or beside it.The el is above Van Sinderen, and the freight tracks are in a cut beside it. |
|
|
(Sponsored) |
iPhone 6 (4.7 Inch) Premium PU Leather Wallet Case - Red w/ Floral Interior - by Notch-It |
|
| (76767) | |
Re: To el or not to el, that is the question! |
|
|
Posted by RIPTA42HopeTunnel on Thu Apr 21 12:29:10 2005, in response to Re: To el or not to el, that is the question!, posted by #5 - Dyre Ave on Thu Apr 21 10:29:50 2005. I wonder why New York didn't make extensive use Chicago-style "alley L's".The City of Chicago already owned the alleys, and building over the streets would have required consent of the property owners. New York doesn't have City-owned alleys behind buildings, and property owners didn't have to OK building els over the streets. |
|
|
| (76770) | |
Re: To el or not to el, that is the question! |
|
|
Posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Thu Apr 21 12:42:46 2005, in response to Re: To el or not to el, that is the question!, posted by RIPTA42HopeTunnel on Thu Apr 21 12:29:10 2005. And in the case where they were built over "alleys" such as the case of the M train el, it was originally a surface railroad, converted to subway use, and later elevated. |
|
|
| (76822) | |
Re: Age of the Els Re: To el or not to el, that is the question! |
|
|
Posted by Mellow One on Thu Apr 21 15:50:07 2005, in response to Age of the Els Re: To el or not to el, that is the question!, posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Wed Apr 20 14:15:21 2005. The 3rd Ave El started service on the Westchester Ave (later White Plains Road) line from a connection at 150th St due to the unfinished Harlem River Tunnel in 1904. The 1905 date when the subway service started to Bronx Park & 180th St. In 1918, the line was extended to the current White Plains Road route and the connection with the 3rd Ave El Webster Ave extension at Gun Hill opened in 1920. That construction also began in 1918. The original 180th St stub terminal was removed in 1951 along with the 2nd/3rd Ave El Bergen St Cutoff structure which replaced the original 150th St connection in 1918. |
|
|
| (76842) | |
Re: Age of the Els Re: To el or not to el, that is the question! |
|
|
Posted by American Pig on Thu Apr 21 16:52:54 2005, in response to Age of the Els Re: To el or not to el, that is the question!, posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Wed Apr 20 14:15:21 2005. The answer is without a doubt, the IND El at Smith-9th and 4th. |
|
|
| (76898) | |
Re: To el or not to el, that is the question! |
|
|
Posted by 7 to Main St on Thu Apr 21 19:46:07 2005, in response to Re: To el or not to el, that is the question!, posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Thu Apr 21 08:16:53 2005. How can I get my hand on a copy or 2? |
|
|
| (76931) | |
Re: To el or not to el, that is the question! |
|
|
Posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Thu Apr 21 21:34:02 2005, in response to Re: To el or not to el, that is the question!, posted by 7 to Main St on Thu Apr 21 19:46:07 2005. I dunno, I bought it at the Transit Museum in either 1990 or 1991. |
|
|
| (76932) | |
Re: Age of the Els Re: To el or not to el, that is the question! |
|
|
Posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Thu Apr 21 21:36:22 2005, in response to Re: Age of the Els Re: To el or not to el, that is the question!, posted by American Pig on Thu Apr 21 16:52:54 2005. Actually you are correct! I didn't think of that, and that is technically an "el".I don't buy the 121st Street incline to the Archer Ave subway as an "el" line. |
|
|
| (76951) | |
Re: To el or not to el, that is the question! |
|
|
Posted by 7 to Main St on Thu Apr 21 22:54:32 2005, in response to Re: To el or not to el, that is the question!, posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Thu Apr 21 21:34:02 2005. Oh. Can you scan it then? |
|
|
| (76965) | |
Re: To el or not to el, that is the question! |
|
|
Posted by R42 4787 on Thu Apr 21 23:20:03 2005, in response to Re: To el or not to el, that is the question!, posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Thu Apr 21 10:19:32 2005. There are remnants of the original 1928 station about a 1/2 block east of the current station (look carefully). |
|
|
| (76981) | |
Re: To el or not to el, that is the question! |
|
|
Posted by 7 to Main St on Fri Apr 22 00:30:28 2005, in response to Re: To el or not to el, that is the question!, posted by R42 4787 on Thu Apr 21 23:20:03 2005. Yea, where the switch is on the main st side if I recall, theres girders where the tracks should have been on. |
|
|
| (77015) | |
Re: To el or not to el, that is the question! |
|
|
Posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Fri Apr 22 05:40:17 2005, in response to Re: To el or not to el, that is the question!, posted by 7 to Main St on Thu Apr 21 22:54:32 2005. One day when I have time. It's big, the size of a normal "The Map". |
|
|
| (77083) | |
Re: Age of the Els Re: To el or not to el, that is the question! |
|
|
Posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Fri Apr 22 11:57:35 2005, in response to Re: Age of the Els Re: To el or not to el, that is the question!, posted by American Pig on Thu Apr 21 16:52:54 2005. That's not an el, it's a viaduct. |
|
|
| (77169) | |
Re: To el or not to el, that is the question! |
|
|
Posted by #5 - Dyre Ave on Fri Apr 22 13:31:21 2005, in response to Re: To el or not to el, that is the question!, posted by RIPTA42HopeTunnel on Thu Apr 21 12:29:10 2005. Thanks, RIPTA. I didn't know that property owners had to be consulted in order to build els over the streets in Chicago. |
|
|
| (77655) | |
Re: Age of the Els Re: To el or not to el, that is the question! |
|
|
Posted by American Pig on Sat Apr 23 14:45:45 2005, in response to Re: Age of the Els Re: To el or not to el, that is the question!, posted by American Pig on Thu Apr 21 16:52:54 2005. Vhy a duct? |
|
|
| (77656) | |
Re: Age of the Els Re: To el or not to el, that is the question! |
|
|
Posted by American Pig on Sat Apr 23 14:45:59 2005, in response to Re: Age of the Els Re: To el or not to el, that is the question!, posted by American Pig on Sat Apr 23 14:45:45 2005. Oops, responded to the wrong post. |
|
|
| (77670) | |
Re: Age of the Els Re: To el or not to el, that is the question! |
|
|
Posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Sat Apr 23 16:00:57 2005, in response to Re: Age of the Els Re: To el or not to el, that is the question!, posted by American Pig on Sat Apr 23 14:45:45 2005. Better than a chicken? |
|
|
| (77707) | |
Re: To el or not to el, that is the question! |
|
|
Posted by Rapid Transit Series on Sat Apr 23 18:06:43 2005, in response to Re: To el or not to el, that is the question!, posted by #5 - Dyre Ave on Thu Apr 21 10:29:50 2005. Quality of life wasn't as important back then. You can thank Jacob Riis for taking those photos... |
|
|
| (80705) | |
Re: Age of the Els Re: To el or not to el, that is the question! |
|
|
Posted by EMSR7000 on Sat Apr 30 16:20:34 2005, in response to Age of the Els Re: To el or not to el, that is the question!, posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Wed Apr 20 14:15:21 2005. I went back and reread this thread today. My question is, did anybody come up with accurate dates for the Liberty el.And a broader question - is there any centralized source for construction dates of all the els (including those which were subsequently abandoned)? |
|
|
| (80753) | |
Re: Age of the Els Re: To el or not to el, that is the question! |
|
|
Posted by RedbirdR33 on Sat Apr 30 20:47:09 2005, in response to Age of the Els Re: To el or not to el, that is the question!, posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Wed Apr 20 14:15:21 2005. White Plains: - 135th to Jackson - July 10, 1905 -Jackson to 180th - Nov 26, 1904 (don't ask me how that was a few months later than the former That's an easy one Chris. The el structure was finished before the 149 Street Tunnel was so the original service on the el was provided by 3 Avenue trains running via the Westchester Avenue Cutoff. Larry, RedbirdR33 |
|
|
| (80756) | |
Re: Age of the Els Re: To el or not to el, that is the question! |
|
|
Posted by SUBWAYMAN on Sat Apr 30 20:54:32 2005, in response to Age of the Els Re: To el or not to el, that is the question!, posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Wed Apr 20 14:15:21 2005. Jamaica/Broadway El:-Essex to Marcy - Sept 16, 1909 -Marcy to Myrtle - Jan 17, 1916 (replacement of older el) -(Myrtle to Central) - July 29, 1914 (replacement of older el) -(Central to Wyckoff) - July 1, 1918 (replacement of older el) -(Wykcoff to Fresh Pond) - Feb 22, 1915 -Myrtle to Alabama Ave - Dec 21, 1916 -Alabama to Cypress Hills - 1893 -Cypress Hills to 111th St - May 28, 1917 -111th St to 168th ST - July 3, 1918 The section of el from Marcy Ave to roughly Lexington Ave has lattice pillars from 1888, it was rebuilt under traffic, so some orginal steelwork remains. The stations, with the exception of Marcy Ave were rebuilt. Also, doesn't the section of el at Van Siclen Ave station date back to 1885? |
|
|
| (80762) | |
Re: Age of the Els Re: To el or not to el, that is the question! |
|
|
Posted by RedbirdR33 on Sat Apr 30 21:10:15 2005, in response to Re: Age of the Els Re: To el or not to el, that is the question!, posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Wed Apr 20 15:07:40 2005. Vincent Seyfried is usually pretty accurate, so I will accept the Liberty El as 1915.So is the Livonia El between Pennsylvania Ave and New Lots the winner? Chris: The Fulton Street El ran as far east as Grant Avenue from July 16, 1894 until September 25, 1915 when it was extended along Liberty Avenue to Lefferts Avenue.(Today's Lefferts Blvd). This must be the 1915 date that Seyfried is refering to. The Jamaica Avenue El was extended from the Cypress Hills Terminal to 111 Street on May 28, 1917 and to 168 Street on July 3, 1918. Note that there was an earlier operation of Lexington Avenue El trains to Jamaica utilizing the Crescent Street Incline and surface streetcar tracks on Jamaica Avenue. This operation was short-lived and lasted only from May 30,1893 to December 8, 1893. There was also another short-lived BRT service to Jamaica utilizing the Chestnut Street Incline and then via the LIRR . This lasted only from October 4, 1898 to January 10,1898 and should not be confused with the BRT-LIRR Joint Service to the Rockaways. This service used the same ramp and lasted from July 17,1898 to September 3, 1917. Larry, RedbirdR33 |
|
|
| (80979) | |
Re: Age of the Els |
|
|
Posted by SPUI on Sun May 1 12:20:26 2005, in response to Age of the Els Re: To el or not to el, that is the question!, posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Wed Apr 20 14:15:21 2005. I've compiled most of the post-1904 dates (subway and el) here, and most have been checked against New York Times articles. When I get a chance, I'm going to go through this list and try to verify the ones I don't have. |
|
|
| (80981) | |
Re: Age of the Els Re: To el or not to el, that is the question! |
|
|
Posted by SPUI on Sun May 1 12:22:38 2005, in response to Re: Age of the Els Re: To el or not to el, that is the question!, posted by RedbirdR33 on Sat Apr 30 21:10:15 2005. October 4, 1898 to January 10, 1898? |
|
|
| (80982) | |
Re: Age of the Els Re: To el or not to el, that is the question! |
|
|
Posted by SPUI on Sun May 1 12:24:51 2005, in response to Re: Age of the Els Re: To el or not to el, that is the question!, posted by EMSR7000 on Sat Apr 30 16:20:34 2005. September 25, 1915 from Grant to Lefferts - the rest was before 1904. I've been working on a list here, with most dates verified against contemporary New York Times articles; it currently has very little pre-1904 though. |
|
|
| (80985) | |
Re: To el or not to el, that is the question! |
|
|
Posted by SPUI on Sun May 1 12:37:15 2005, in response to Re: To el or not to el, that is the question!, posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Wed Apr 20 13:22:51 2005. Some contenders for newest el, some of which are extremely sketchy:Eastern Parkway Line east of Pennsylvania Avenue - October 16, 1922 Flushing Line east of 103rd Street - January 21, 1928 (had been partly open previously, but there were structural problems and they had to rebuild it) Culver Line over Gowanus Canal - October 7, 1933 Culver Ramp - October 30, 1954 Fulton Street ramp - April 29, 1956 Rockaway Line - June 28, 1956 Dyre Avenue-White Plans Road connection - May 6, 1957 Rockaway Line last bit to Far Rockaway - January 16, 1958 Jamaica-Archer ramp - December 11, 1988 Franklin Avenue - 1999 (hah!) Looks like the Flushing Line is the latest one that everyone would agree counts. |
|
|
| (81001) | |
Re: Age of the Els Re: To el or not to el, that is the question! |
|
|
Posted by RedbirdR33 on Sun May 1 13:19:26 2005, in response to Re: Age of the Els Re: To el or not to el, that is the question!, posted by SPUI on Sun May 1 12:22:38 2005. October 4, 1898 to January 10, 1898?See my corrected post. Larry, RedbirdR33 |
|
|
| (81089) | |
Re: Age of the Els Re: To el or not to el, that is the question! |
|
|
Posted by EMSR7000 on Sun May 1 20:01:54 2005, in response to Re: Age of the Els Re: To el or not to el, that is the question!, posted by SPUI on Sun May 1 12:24:51 2005. Great work! I just uncovered an old NRHS publication which covers the opening of Manhattan Railway lines. I'll try and summarize it for you. |
|
|
| (81310) | |
Re: To el or not to el, that is the question! |
|
|
Posted by 5119 on Mon May 2 11:28:49 2005, in response to Re: To el or not to el, that is the question!, posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Tue Apr 19 09:45:31 2005. Also, the 3rd Avenue L from 143rd street to 138th street. |
|
|
| (81315) | |
Re: To el or not to el, that is the question! |
|
|
Posted by RonInBayside on Mon May 2 12:22:32 2005, in response to Re: To el or not to el, that is the question!, posted by #5 - Dyre Ave on Thu Apr 21 10:29:50 2005. Are there enough alley in New York where there's room for that?Los Angeles has narrow alleys cutting through virtually every residential block except where apt buildings ate up the whole space. Miami Metrorail has its own ROW elevated running which parralels or crosses streets. It doesn't follow above them. |
|
|
[1 2] |
||
|
Page 2 of 2 |
||
