|
|
| Re: [PHOTOS:] PITKIN AVE-- PROFF?? (Was - Re: Fulton Street Subway) (1619769) | |||
 |
|||
| Home > SubChat | |||
|
[ Read Responses | Post a New Response | Return to the Index ] |
|
||
|
Re: [PHOTOS:] PITKIN AVE-- PROFF?? (Was - Re: Fulton Street Subway) |
|
|
Posted by Asgard on Fri May 5 15:22:27 2023, in response to [PHOTOS:] PITKIN AVE-- PROFF?? (Was - Re: Fulton Street Subway), posted by qveensboro_plaza on Sun Apr 30 19:33:43 2023. Joe Cunningham very kindly sent me this, with his permission to post it here. Thanks to Joe. Any formatting problems are the result of my copying and pasting his text below.Facts vs. Rumor After some many years of questions on tours and in regard to books, I have decided to address some of the most common questions about NY rapid transit history and development. No.1 Always asked re; 76th Street station on the Liberty Avenue extension of the IND Fulton Street line. Fact: Something more has to be there. 1. The end of the tunnel is not part of the side walls and ceiling. Rather it is a concrete curtain wall of a different color and apparent age from the side walls. 2. The bench walls on each side are cut with the internal ceramic ducts hanging out of the ends. No one would ever end a bench wall in such a manner. 3. The track and third rail end unevenly, the bumping blocks appearing to be added components. 4. Most significant, A4 track has signals that face the wall. These are complete installations with associated stop mechanisms, insulated joints and pin bonds. Signal equipment was, and is, extremely expensive, no one would install signals that could be seen only by phantom trains coming out of inter-dimensional space through that wall. 5. While observations 1-4 are based on a visit with NYCTA staff in 1997, I was told by a formersignal maintainer in 1978 that he and others routinely entered through the yard portal to salvage unused signal relays and other components for use elsewhere. That was the first I ever heard of the alleged extension; thus, it did not make volume 3 of my book – in fact we were talking about IND signals at a shop where he was purchasing the newly published book. 6. I personally observed two yard leads that turned off into portals blocked with cinder block walls. The rails had been removed but the ties were still in place with spike holes and tie plate gouges where such had been installed. Clearly track had once existed precisely where the former signal maintainer had said that he and others had accessed the tunnel. Those were observed during a switching move of road trains around construction which required a relay move into the yard in the Spring of 1987. 7. In regard to the photograph of the GRS route interlocking machine at Euclid Avenue that shows the extension of the line, it is highly unlikely that a panel with a display of non-existent track would be built. For example. The installation of the US&S type UR (Union Route) route interlocking machine in the tower at Grand Central on the former northbound express track in 1959 left incomplete the section north of 86 th Street for which contracts had not yet been drawn even though the tracks at that point were in vital operation since 1918! The other portions of the board were activated as each zone was cut over. Only when the northern portion was contracted was the board equipped completely, that portion being equipped with components compatible with GRS NX (eNtrance-eXit) interlocking equipment; in fact, stenciled lettering indicates the different types of lamps required for the portions equipped by those respective companies. 8. Several former employees have told of a pump room accessed by door from the bench wall of the active yard lead that emerges from behind the wall of the Grant Avenue station. Located on the portion over and adjacent to the probable location of the trackage it is said to have a door on the opposite side that accesses the extension. Doors are more costly than concrete walls – again, money would not been spent on a useless door – this is after all not the legendary Winchester mansion! This door has not been observed personally. 9. On a survey of the street above in June 1980 new sidewalks were being poured and it appearedthere had been some covered gratings on an orientation that would have angled away from a direct plumb line – possibly a mezzanine or fare control area? If there is nothing there, why the effort to seal it so completely, with concrete curtain wall, double cinder block barriers at the yard portals and a sealed door in a pump room. The only possible explanation is rising water issues. It is said that there are remnants of water ways Conduit Blvd and Force Tube Avenue both refer to a network of former water courses in the general region. So where does it end? Probably nowhere unless there is someday a need to excavate the area for some future project. At this point I should like to remark on some recent comments on other issues. The author of a recent piece on the alleged extension also mentions the delay of the completion of the Nassau Street line of the BMT as being caused by engineering difficulties. While it is true that such required the use of manual excavation without blasting due to the narrow street and aged structures, the primary cause of the delay was that Mayor Hylan took office before the section contracts were signed and used his influence to prevent passage. The same was true of the eastern section of the 14th Street line when specifications were changed to a subway rather than an elevated line east of the Montrose Avenue station. In both instances contracts were signed immediately upon Hylan’s departure from office. An ingenious means of lowering cars into the Montrose Avenue station was devised to prevent loss of franchise but that is another story. Likewise, it was said that the BRT did not operate over the Brooklyn Bridge due to fees. While I have not seen documentation of such, it does not seem that there would be fees, as both the bridge and the subway tunnels were property of the city and the operating contract number 4 leases all needed city property to the New York Municipal Railway Co., the BRT’s subway operating company for the installation of equipment and operation of transit services. There are of course, exceptions. The BRT may have been charged an access fee into the Essex Street station as both the Williamsburg Bridge and the station terminal itself were constructed under the City Dept. of Plant & Structures. The so-called “Bridge Loop Lines” concept had been criticized harshly when proposed in 1905 as it did not access the lower Manhattan business center; the same issue experienced when the original Broadway route was relocated to Elm Street for the IRT and which ended at Brooklyn Bridge and City Hall loop. That required the Contract 2 extension to South Ferry (and Brooklyn). The Nassau Street line was developed to answer that need, and the concept of a Brooklyn Bridge access faded. The lower Manhattan loop concept was superseded by the need for more midtown access, that finally came to fruition in 1967 with the opening of the Chrystie Street connection to the Manhattan bridge and in 1968 to the Eastern lines. As for access to the Brooklyn Bridge, there were two primary technical issues. First is the severe grade of the ramp to the bridge itself. From a personal observation in 1996 on what would have been the Brooklyn Bound track, the grade is so great that it appears more stairway than ramp. Grades are the bane of any railway, especially when trailer cars were operated. The Steinway tunnel is one example. Trailer cars were not used through it. A similarly severe grade is found on the connector at 149th Street Mott Avenue. The southbound loop has a short steep climb out of the station to access the Lex-Jerome line. And of course, the Manhattan Bridge grades on the Manhattan side caused blown motors on opening day in 1915 and remained an issue. The other concern with the Brooklyn Bridge was the cars. Steel cars could not be used until the development of lightweight cars in the 1930s and even those were demonstration trips rather than regular service. The Dual Contracts of 1913 have clauses that specify that the equipment “shall be at least as good” as that operated in the existing line, and the objection to wood dated to the IRT consultant George Gibb’s grudging acceptance of wooden Composite cars in 1903, after numerous damage from collisions and fire the momentum for elimination from subways was building. Other Shibboleths and Unfounded Theories. It has been said that the Myrtle Avenue station at Flatbush Avenue was closed due to street widening. Why street widening should affect a subway route is unfathomable other than perhaps access stairways would need to be removed. In point of fact, the Myrtle Avenue station was closed for lack of patronage and because it would have been too close to the planned extension of the DeKalb Avenue station. The southbound platform was removed in 1959 to allow widening of the tunnel to permit an underpass that allowed the ‘H’ track on the southwesterly side of the bridge to access the bypass track without a grade crossing. The Manhattan Bridge-4th Avenue subway had been initiated under the poorly developed Triborough Plan of 1908. It was assumed that the “outer” tracks would connect to the H tracks while the inner or express tracks would connect to the northeasterly Bridge ‘A’ tracks and no underpass was needed on the southbound side. When structures were modified to “shoehorn” the tracks at Willoughby Street from the Montague Street tunnel and also the connection to the Brighton line, the result was a tangled connection. The revision began in 1956 and was completed in 1962. That involved adding two “outside” tracks south of DeKalb (A3 and A4) to eliminate the crossovers at the north end of the station. Overall, it was necessary to sacrifice the lightly used access of the Montage Street tunnel to the bypass tracks north of DeKalb and also the rarely used access of the bypass tracks to the Brighton line south of the DeKalb station. Only then could the station be extended for ten car trains and the restricted southern end of the platforms be closed. On the site of the old Myrtle Station southbound, the bypass was constructed by relocating the outside track to the location of the former platform. On the northbound side, and unused area was used in part to move the connection between the two tracks that merge to form Bridge track A4. That was done to permit ten car trains to clear the turnouts for Bridge track H2 while waiting for the merging switch to clear another train. It must be remembered that the BRT/BMT Dual Contracts stations constructed prior to 1920 had been planned for trains approximately 475’ long – ten IRT cars or seven 67’ cars. Short extensions were added in 1927 to allow operation of eight 67’ cars or four Triplex units. 42nd Street lower level Somehow a rumor started that the lower level of the 42nd Street station was built to block extension of the IRT Queens line. Beyond the fact that no such extension was ever contemplated in the era of private operation, the statement shows total misunderstanding of the methods and means of subway construction. Any program had to pass review by the Board of Estimate and other city regulatory bodies. Moreover, the IRT could not finish its existing lines, needed a fare increase and was saddled with Manhattan el losses. The purpose of the station platform was to discharge Queens trains at a time when travel to, and development in, Queens was light at the time of design in the early/mid 1920s. The trains would have relayed down to the center track at 33rd Street and returned north. By the time it opened in 1933, Queens had sufficient development to warrant 24 hour through operation. (F trains from Queens terminated at 34th Sixth Avenue on nights and weekends until November 1967) The platform was not completed with tile work until the early 1950s. That relay operation was used for Football Specials to the Polo Grounds from 179th Street in the 1950s. It was used subsequently as a boarding point for Rockaway Playland Specials 1956-8 and for Aqueduct race track Specials for decades. It was used for a while in the early 70s for rush hour E expresses. |
|
|
|