Jump to content

What do you think of the former El's in Manhattan?


Joel Up Front

Recommended Posts

Do you think the 2nd, 3rd, and 9th Avenue Els should have been torn down? The M15 does take the 2nd Avenue El's place (and is the busiest bus route in the US), but of course it has to deal with Manhattan's infamous traffic jams.

 

I used to think no one rode the bus in Manhattan at all because of the subway (as a kid), but I didn't know only a grand total of 4 (or so) major avenues in Manhattan even have subway tracks active and running under them these days...

Link to comment
Share on other sites


3rd Avenue El should of been kept in the Bronx and use it for the SAS. Turn it from IRT to IND/BMT and cut off the connection from the WPR to 3rd Ave el at Gun Hill or preserve.

 

3rd Avenue could use a subway especially since the Bx15/55 has a lot passengers. Hopefully the 2nd Ave Subway could get extended to the Bronx via 3rd ave, if that ever happens, buts this is my head..

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm glad that the elevated subway lines were taken down. They're noisy and really an eye sore. I wish they would've immediately replaced the 2nd avenue el with the second avenue subway which probably will never be finished now. (4)(5)(6) + (M15) are extremely crowded during rush hour, and you have to literally fight to get in the subway at those times.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think it was one of the worst things the city could have ever done. You don't take something down until you have the replacement up and ready to go and they didn't have it then and they STILL don't have it today (at least where 2nd Ave is concerned, I'll get to that in a moment). If people didn't like the trains back then, they had the power to get up and move out. Someone else would have moved in and NYC might be a different place as a result, good or bad. I just think that it was a short sighted move for the city to tear down something as important as an El just because they "promised" to build a subway and because it's an "eyesore". If that's the case then why are el's still around all over the city? And look at 2nd Ave. If the 3rd Ave El had stayed as it was from the Bronx to Manhattan, things wouldn't be so bad on the Lexington Ave Line or the M15 because there would be an alternative. We're STILL waiting for the 2nd Ave Subway which is nothing short of disgusting. The El's were needed then and I dare say they are needed now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If the Elevated lines had stayed, the neighborhoods in Manhattan would not have had as much value as they do today. What they should have done though was build full lines (at least 2 express and 2 local, it would be nice for a super express too) on 1st ave 2nd 3rd, Madison, 5th, 10th and 12th. Also, crosstowns that maybe could have started in NJ, or just at the Hudson river on the west side and make their way into BK and Queens would have been nice. Maybe 200 street, 181 street, 145 street, 125th 86th, 42nd, and one in lower Manhattan. I think if this had been done, there wouldn't be as bad a traffic problem in Manhattan because almost every spot would have been covered with a train, and less buses and taxis would be needed. Take the taxi's and buses off the streets and you have a lot more space.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Both the Second, Third, and Ninth Avenue El had useful purposes. I still don't know why they were torn down. Real estate might have been a factor but they were doing their job. Even though the NY Times might have said in a historic article that real estate was a factor, racism and other things could have been involved. Plus it was okay to tear down Ninth Avenue because of Eighth Avenue and Seventh Avenue. It wasn't okay to tear down Second and Third Avenue. In the eastern section of Manhattan there was only one line throughout its history besides them. The Lexington Avenue Line. That left only two options the bus or Lexington Avenue. That is why Lexington Avenue is overcrowded. If you don't want to ride on the Lexington Avenue Line then you would have to walk to the Sixth Avenue Line. Thus it was stupid to tear them down when they didn't build a Second or a Third Avenue Line.

 

121st_station.jpeg

 

el.jpg

 

Second Avenue in service.

 

NSONYTA6_LARGE.JPG

 

vivian%20el%202.jpg

 

Third Avenue in service.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Isn't the (4) train utilized more than the (5) in Manhattan? Its easily noticeable around 125 Street. Or maybe I need to see how it really looks like during the rush hour.

 

The (4) is packed during rush hours just south of 149th Street when i've seen.

 

The (5) doesn't get packed the most after 3rd Avenue since it runs express AM Peak(Not including the current discontinuation of WPR exp for yr), mainly the (2) has to get all the heat from Tremont to The Hub and then passengers would transfer there. Now its a balance now along the southern WPR.

 

When the (5) gets to 138th, the (4) as I see is a Lot packed compared to the (5) before heading to 125th, so they allow the (4) to go first, leaving the M track.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree. I also have another idea. If the other museums allowed the Transit Museum to rent like two or three other BU cars for an event I don't think they would say no. Although that idea will cost quite a bit of money to transport the cars from those museums to the yards and also have to pay those museums for use of the cars too. I think BUs at sometime did appear on some of the Manhattan ELs but I'm not 100% sure on that.

 

There are a few issues with that:

 

-The Transit Museum does not have the money to sponsor such a trip as well as delivery of the cars to TA property, and delivery back to their rightful owners at the end of the event

-The non NYC BU cars themselves are not fit to run in tunnels (I'm not referring to the wooden construction - I'm referring to the fact that many BU's were taller than subway cars due to their clerestory vent windows). This means the cars would not clear in some subway tunnels necessary to get them to a location for a possible trip

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Both the Second, Third, and Ninth Avenue El had useful purposes. I still don't know why they were torn down. Real estate might have been a factor but they were doing their job. Even though the NY Times might have said in a historic article that real estate was a factor, racism and other things could have been involved. Plus it was okay to tear down Ninth Avenue because of Eighth Avenue and Seventh Avenue. It wasn't okay to tear down Second and Third Avenue. In the eastern section of Manhattan there was only one line throughout its history besides them. The Lexington Avenue Line. That left only two options the bus or Lexington Avenue. That is why Lexington Avenue is overcrowded. If you don't want to ride on the Lexington Avenue Line then you would have to walk to the Sixth Avenue Line. Thus it was stupid to tear them down when they didn't build a Second or a Third Avenue Line.

 

I agree, but at the time, the solution was to replace the lines with bus routes. They didn't anticipate 1st and Lex Avs being as heavily used as they are today.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Now the height clearances that I didn't know. Thanks. Like they say you learn something new everyday.

 

Yup the cars in the museum (1404-1273-1407) were all converted Q type el cars that were converted BACK to their appearance as BU's. However through all the changes that were done, they lost their clerestory vents and original higher upper roofs. The cars were shortened as a result and can fit anywhere in the system, however BU's that are not on NYCT property in most if not all cases are unmodified el cars that retained the original roofs and therefore are too tall for some tunnels.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If the Elevated lines had stayed, the neighborhoods in Manhattan would not have had as much value as they do today. What they should have done though was build full lines (at least 2 express and 2 local, it would be nice for a super express too) on 1st ave 2nd 3rd, Madison, 5th, 10th and 12th. Also, crosstowns that maybe could have started in NJ, or just at the Hudson river on the west side and make their way into BK and Queens would have been nice. Maybe 200 street, 181 street, 145 street, 125th 86th, 42nd, and one in lower Manhattan. I think if this had been done, there wouldn't be as bad a traffic problem in Manhattan because almost every spot would have been covered with a train, and less buses and taxis would be needed. Take the taxi's and buses off the streets and you have a lot more space.

That's way way way too many lines.:eek::tdown:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well that idea could work with subway cars like the other Arnines or BMT Standard #2775, which needs A LOT of work! But like you said there is no money for that yet.

 

Heh. The 3 AB's on TA property would need to have their restoration finished first though. Also that's very rarely done because the cost of bringing those cars down to NY and returning them back to where they came from must all be borne by the TA or the Museum. It is possible though. Swaps like that do exist. One similar swap is LIRR Caboose C-60 which is on display in the Transit Museum, on loan from RMLI (Railroad Museum of Long Island)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I hate to be off topic, but what is the current status of those three AB standards? I also heard R1 103 is also going to be the next Arnine car to be restored.

 

All undergoing restoration, however restoration is a long process so it doesn't mean results will be immediate.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.