Somewhat related to the topic of tunnels, where are there subways that are not railways, but roads? Particularly in the U.S., the term "subway" almost exclusively refers to an underground rapid transit railway, but there are a few places where the term is applied to an underpass or tunnel carrying a roadway. Here's the one I know best, in Marysville, PA: https://goo.gl/maps/nH3GY5p7TGL2
I know that in the UK and other commonwealth countries, the term is rather more common and often refers to pedestrian undercrossings. Are subways carrying roads also more common in these areas?
Unless it has intersections or access points or whatnot in the subterranean part, I'd stop short of calling it a subway. I wouldn't really call your Marysville example a subway. I'd say that's an extra-long underpass under a former railyard (1968 aerial imagery plus old topo maps confirm there was a railyard there).
Before the Link LRT was built, Seattle's transit tunnel would meet the definition. Sure, it was transit only, but until a few years ago, it was buses. Now it's both buses AND rail.
Lower Wacker Dr in downtown Chicago certainly fits the bill. IIRC, there's also a Lower Michigan Ave in downtown Chicago as well, and possibly a few other subterranean streets.
Quote from: froggie on November 09, 2015, 07:50:53 AM
Lower Wacker Dr in downtown Chicago certainly fits the bill. IIRC, there's also a Lower Michigan Ave in downtown Chicago as well, and possibly a few other subterranean streets.
They are actually at ground level, not subterranean, the main street is elevated. There is a whole system of them in Chicago due to traffic volumes and solving the issue of how to deliver to businesses that have few if any alleys.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multilevel_streets_in_Chicago
Guanajuato, Mexico famously has a whole network of underground roads to help keep traffic out of the very narrow, winding streets of the city center.
https://www.google.com/maps/@21.0161792,-101.2571456,3a,75y,120.47h,76.93t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sLNCzbQTjSVf8hYV2zx9JGw!2e0!6s%2F%2Fgeo1.ggpht.com%2Fcbk%3Fpanoid%3DLNCzbQTjSVf8hYV2zx9JGw%26output%3Dthumbnail%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26thumb%3D2%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D342.73972%26pitch%3D0!7i13312!8i6656
This is not really an American usage of the word "subway," despite perhaps a couple of outliers. So I would say that while there are many subterranean tunnels of various kinds, I don't know what makes one a subway or not since this is not really a concept in the American language outside of transit use. Perhaps if you could better define what makes a road tunnel a subway, we could offer you more suggestions.
We have a few road "subways" in our transit system here, but they are for buses. The Harvard Square one is called a "busway" (notice the subtle letter shift), the South Boston one is called a "transitway" (the marketing of the line there has avoided from the beginning any explicit acknowledgement that it is indeed a bus).
Quote from: froggie on November 09, 2015, 07:50:53 AM
Unless it has intersections or access points or whatnot in the subterranean part, I'd stop short of calling it a subway. I wouldn't really call your Marysville example a subway. I'd say that's an extra-long underpass under a former railyard (1968 aerial imagery plus old topo maps confirm there was a railyard there).
Well, regardless of what you or I would name it, it is in fact called a subway (move around a bit in StreetView and you'll see the various signage that refers to it as such).
Quote from: Pete from Boston on November 09, 2015, 11:09:55 AM
This is not really an American usage of the word "subway," despite perhaps a couple of outliers.
That's right, the word is seldom used in the U.S. to mean this. So the outliers are, indeed, what the question is about.
QuoteSo I would say that while there are many subterranean tunnels of various kinds, I don't know what makes one a subway or not since this is not really a concept in the American language outside of transit use. Perhaps if you could better define what makes a road tunnel a subway, we could offer you more suggestions.
Anything actually called such, in common or official parlance, such as the Marysville example above.
You could include pedestrian subways, too; I was thinking they wouldn't be nearly as uncommon in the U.S. as road subways, but if they are then they're worth mentioning. Pedestrian subways are, of course, a dime a dozen in other countries. (Or maybe a shilling a score...)
QuoteWe have a few road "subways" in our transit system here, but they are for buses. The Harvard Square one is called a "busway" (notice the subtle letter shift), the South Boston one is called a "transitway" (the marketing of the line there has avoided from the beginning any explicit acknowledgement that it is indeed a bus).
Are any of the non-rail transit facilities actually called "subway", or is the term reserved 100% for trains in the U.S.?
Not even the bus rapid transit line is called a subway, because subway necessarily means train here.
The Richards Boulevard (former US 40/99W) undercrossing of the Union Pacific line in Davis is officially the "Davis Subway" -
https://localwiki.org/davis/Richards_Underpass
Quote from: Pete from Boston on November 09, 2015, 04:47:25 PM
Not even the bus rapid transit line is called a subway, because subway necessarily means train here.
I can find a very few citations of the term "subway" in a non-transit sense specific to the Boston area, and they're all quite archaic. I also found a forum topic (http://www.railroad.net/forums/viewtopic.php?f=65&t=88993#p993772) that gets into the terminology a bit, particularly as it pertains to that area. One commenter asserts that the Harvard tunnel was indeed considered a "subway" before its conversion to bus use; another has it on someone's authority that "subways" specifically accommodate
trolleys, whereas "tunnels" carry
trains (as in heavy rail). And a couple of others mention some pedestrian subways in the area; in fact, I was just about to ask myself if there aren't still one or two pedestrian underpasses still occasionally referred to as "subways"?
In Boston when I made an underground transfer to one of the Silver Line routes, I was surprised it was a bus with rubber wheels on a road, rather than a train on rails.
I've heard Rochester, Minnesota has a non-trivial network of underground pedestrian links connecting buildings downtown, and they call that The Subway.
Quote from: vtk on November 09, 2015, 06:15:16 PM
I've heard Rochester, Minnesota has a non-trivial network of underground pedestrian links connecting buildings downtown, and they call that The Subway.
So it does, and it's paired with over-ground components called Skyways. There is also a rather more trivial network of subways and skyways in Rochester, NY–but there, the whole system is called the "Skyway" regardless of grade, and the term "subway" exclusively refers to the defunct underground transit tunnel*.
*But is it really a tunnel? It was built at grade or even above (on an aqueduct) as part of the Erie Canal–but that's another thread. :-)
Quote from: Pete from Boston on November 09, 2015, 04:47:25 PM
Not even the bus rapid transit line is called a subway, because subway necessarily means train here.
Either that or a popular fast-food chain, but I digress. While many large cities do have subway lines, the only one I've ever been aware of that actually describes its system as such is the New York MTA. Other places, like Washington, call it Metro.
Quote from: Henry on November 11, 2015, 11:35:36 AM
Quote from: Pete from Boston on November 09, 2015, 04:47:25 PM
Not even the bus rapid transit line is called a subway, because subway necessarily means train here.
Either that or a popular fast-food chain, but I digress. While many large cities do have subway lines, the only one I've ever been aware of that actually describes its system as such is the New York MTA. Other places, like Washington, call it Metro.
Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority uses "Subway". http://www.mbta.com/schedules_and_maps/subway/
Quote from: dfilpus on November 11, 2015, 11:53:13 AM
Quote from: Henry on November 11, 2015, 11:35:36 AM
Quote from: Pete from Boston on November 09, 2015, 04:47:25 PM
Not even the bus rapid transit line is called a subway, because subway necessarily means train here.
Either that or a popular fast-food chain, but I digress. While many large cities do have subway lines, the only one I've ever been aware of that actually describes its system as such is the New York MTA. Other places, like Washington, call it Metro.
Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority uses "Subway". http://www.mbta.com/schedules_and_maps/subway/
Yeah, and Philly too. Also Newark, NJ, and as I mentioned before, Rochester, NY.
But of course, we're looking for things called "subways" that are NOT trains (or sandwiches).
iPhone
Quote from: dfilpus on November 11, 2015, 11:53:13 AM
Quote from: Henry on November 11, 2015, 11:35:36 AM
Quote from: Pete from Boston on November 09, 2015, 04:47:25 PM
Not even the bus rapid transit line is called a subway, because subway necessarily means train here.
Either that or a popular fast-food chain, but I digress. While many large cities do have subway lines, the only one I've ever been aware of that actually describes its system as such is the New York MTA. Other places, like Washington, call it Metro.
Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority uses "Subway". http://www.mbta.com/schedules_and_maps/subway/
Except nobody calls it that. Unless things have changed recently, it's the T.
Expanding slightly outside the US, Toronto's rapid transit lines are referred to as the Subway, both officially and colloquially.
Quote from: cl94 on November 11, 2015, 12:33:03 PM
Quote from: dfilpus on November 11, 2015, 11:53:13 AM
Quote from: Henry on November 11, 2015, 11:35:36 AM
Quote from: Pete from Boston on November 09, 2015, 04:47:25 PM
Not even the bus rapid transit line is called a subway, because subway necessarily means train here.
Either that or a popular fast-food chain, but I digress. While many large cities do have subway lines, the only one I've ever been aware of that actually describes its system as such is the New York MTA. Other places, like Washington, call it Metro.
Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority uses "Subway". http://www.mbta.com/schedules_and_maps/subway/
Except nobody calls it that. Unless things have changed recently, it's the T.
Expanding slightly outside the US, Toronto's rapid transit lines are referred to as the Subway, both officially and colloquially.
Are there any cities in the US other than New York that colloquially uses the term "subway" for their underground rail line? DC uses Metro.
Quote from: cl94 on November 11, 2015, 12:33:03 PM
Quote from: dfilpus on November 11, 2015, 11:53:13 AM
Quote from: Henry on November 11, 2015, 11:35:36 AM
Quote from: Pete from Boston on November 09, 2015, 04:47:25 PM
Not even the bus rapid transit line is called a subway, because subway necessarily means train here.
Either that or a popular fast-food chain, but I digress. While many large cities do have subway lines, the only one I've ever been aware of that actually describes its system as such is the New York MTA. Other places, like Washington, call it Metro.
Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority uses "Subway". http://www.mbta.com/schedules_and_maps/subway/
Except nobody calls it that. Unless things have changed recently, it's the T.
Right, but if you were to describe what the system is, you'd use the term "subway". As in: "When you're visiting Boston you can get around on the T, which is their subway."
Quote from: The Nature Boy on November 11, 2015, 01:40:19 PM
Are there any cities in the US other than New York that colloquially uses the term "subway" for their underground rail line? DC uses Metro.
Again, Newark, NJ.
Quote from: Pete from Boston on November 09, 2015, 04:47:25 PM
Not even the bus rapid transit line is called a subway, because subway necessarily means train here.
Isn't this the facility you're referring to? https://goo.gl/maps/3VJFxeWJgK82
Quote from: cl94 on November 11, 2015, 12:33:03 PMExcept nobody calls it that. Unless things have changed recently, it's the T.
"Subway" is indeed used to refer to those portions that are underground. "Central subway," for example, is a term used to specifically identify that part of the Green Line where the lines are converged and running in the same tunnel.
I have no knowledge of how people spoke about this prior to the branding of the MBTA in the 60s, but I have heard spoken the words "Red Line subway," perhaps distinguishing it from the (majority?) part that is above ground.
Further confusing things, "the T" is used not only to refer to the rapid transit lines in particular, but also to the entire MBTA system and organization. Therefore, you get paradoxical conversations like "Is it near the T?" "No, just the commuter rail."
Quote from: empirestate on November 11, 2015, 02:41:03 PM
Quote from: Pete from Boston on November 09, 2015, 04:47:25 PM
Not even the bus rapid transit line is called a subway, because subway necessarily means train here.
Isn't this the facility you're referring to? https://goo.gl/maps/3VJFxeWJgK82
That's the Harvard Square Busway. The "bus rapid transit" is that part of the Silver Line that runs through the so-called "Piers Transitway."
Quote from: Pete from Boston on November 11, 2015, 05:57:07 PM
Quote from: empirestate on November 11, 2015, 02:41:03 PM
Quote from: Pete from Boston on November 09, 2015, 04:47:25 PM
Not even the bus rapid transit line is called a subway, because subway necessarily means train here.
Isn't this the facility you're referring to? https://goo.gl/maps/3VJFxeWJgK82
That's the Harvard Square Busway. The "bus rapid transit" is that part of the Silver Line that runs through the so-called "Piers Transitway."
Oh, OK. So the Silver Line doesn't count, but the Harvard Square Busway does since it's actually signed as a "subway", that being its original name. So here's a case where "subway"
doesn't necessarily mean train, although the original use of this subway was for trolleys, which are at least train-like.
Anyway, at least we have one winner in Boston–er, Cambridge!
Quote from: empirestate on November 11, 2015, 06:46:40 PM
Quote from: Pete from Boston on November 11, 2015, 05:57:07 PM
Quote from: empirestate on November 11, 2015, 02:41:03 PM
Quote from: Pete from Boston on November 09, 2015, 04:47:25 PM
Not even the bus rapid transit line is called a subway, because subway necessarily means train here.
Isn't this the facility you're referring to? https://goo.gl/maps/3VJFxeWJgK82
That's the Harvard Square Busway. The "bus rapid transit" is that part of the Silver Line that runs through the so-called "Piers Transitway."
Oh, OK. So the Silver Line doesn't count, but the Harvard Square Busway does since it's actually signed as a "subway", that being its original name. So here's a case where "subway" doesn't necessarily mean train, although the original use of this subway was for trolleys, which are at least train-like.
Anyway, at least we have one winner in Boston–er, Cambridge!
OK, I see what you're talking about now. I have always assumed this referred to the fact that this tunnel enters the Harvard Square subway station (the buses let off more or less at the station lobby).
Bus schedules and stop listings refer to this tunnel as "Harvard Upper Busway" and "Harvard Lower Busway."
If we're allowing examples from any form of transportation not involving trains, I submit the following:
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FPLZcNGK.jpg&hash=62c25e22c46cd722e151d80cbf1a645b006841f6)
This is the name of a hiking trail on Mount Mansfield in Vermont. It draws its name from the fact that it takes you along the side of the mountain, parallel to but below the main trail along the top of the ridge.
Quote from: empirestate on November 11, 2015, 02:41:03 PM
Quote from: cl94 on November 11, 2015, 12:33:03 PM
Quote from: dfilpus on November 11, 2015, 11:53:13 AM
Quote from: Henry on November 11, 2015, 11:35:36 AM
Quote from: Pete from Boston on November 09, 2015, 04:47:25 PM
Not even the bus rapid transit line is called a subway, because subway necessarily means train here.
Either that or a popular fast-food chain, but I digress. While many large cities do have subway lines, the only one I've ever been aware of that actually describes its system as such is the New York MTA. Other places, like Washington, call it Metro.
Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority uses "Subway". http://www.mbta.com/schedules_and_maps/subway/
Except nobody calls it that. Unless things have changed recently, it's the T.
Right, but if you were to describe what the system is, you'd use the term "subway". As in: "When you're visiting Boston you can get around on the T, which is their subway."
Quote from: The Nature Boy on November 11, 2015, 01:40:19 PM
Are there any cities in the US other than New York that colloquially uses the term "subway" for their underground rail line? DC uses Metro.
Again, Newark, NJ.
Quote from: Pete from Boston on November 09, 2015, 04:47:25 PM
Not even the bus rapid transit line is called a subway, because subway necessarily means train here.
Isn't this the facility you're referring to? https://goo.gl/maps/3VJFxeWJgK82
NJ Transit is trying to de-emphasize the "Newark City Subway" name, especially now that a new all-surface branch to Broad Street Station is part of the system. The entire system is now the "Newark Light Rail" which is also technically more correct, since subways are supposed to be rapid transit services, not trolley/light rail. But colloquially, yes, it's still the subway.
Quote from: bzakharin on November 12, 2015, 12:37:31 PM
Quote from: empirestate on November 11, 2015, 02:41:03 PM
Quote from: cl94 on November 11, 2015, 12:33:03 PM
Quote from: dfilpus on November 11, 2015, 11:53:13 AM
Quote from: Henry on November 11, 2015, 11:35:36 AM
Quote from: Pete from Boston on November 09, 2015, 04:47:25 PM
Not even the bus rapid transit line is called a subway, because subway necessarily means train here.
Either that or a popular fast-food chain, but I digress. While many large cities do have subway lines, the only one I've ever been aware of that actually describes its system as such is the New York MTA. Other places, like Washington, call it Metro.
Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority uses "Subway". http://www.mbta.com/schedules_and_maps/subway/
Except nobody calls it that. Unless things have changed recently, it's the T.
Right, but if you were to describe what the system is, you'd use the term "subway". As in: "When you're visiting Boston you can get around on the T, which is their subway."
Quote from: The Nature Boy on November 11, 2015, 01:40:19 PM
Are there any cities in the US other than New York that colloquially uses the term "subway" for their underground rail line? DC uses Metro.
Again, Newark, NJ.
Quote from: Pete from Boston on November 09, 2015, 04:47:25 PM
Not even the bus rapid transit line is called a subway, because subway necessarily means train here.
Isn't this the facility you're referring to? https://goo.gl/maps/3VJFxeWJgK82
NJ Transit is trying to de-emphasize the "Newark City Subway" name, especially now that a new all-surface branch to Broad Street Station is part of the system. The entire system is now the "Newark Light Rail" which is also technically more correct, since subways are supposed to be rapid transit services, not trolley/light rail. But colloquially, yes, it's still the subway.
Which I have found unfortunate, since "subway" implies that rare intensive infrastructure few cities have, and which I felt was good for Newark's, well, image struggles.
That also happened when Newark got rid of its PCC cars and switched to Kinki-Sharyo cars like those in the then-new Hudson(-Bergen) Light Rail system. It seemed to me that NJT was going for a unified regional light-rail "brand."
Quote from: bzakharin on November 12, 2015, 12:37:31 PM
NJ Transit is trying to de-emphasize the "Newark City Subway" name, especially now that a new all-surface branch to Broad Street Station is part of the system. The entire system is now the "Newark Light Rail" which is also technically more correct, since subways are supposed to be rapid transit services, not trolley/light rail. But colloquially, yes, it's still the subway.
Interesting; that's in direct opposition to the comment (http://www.railroad.net/forums/viewtopic.php?f=65&t=88993#p994624) I referred to earlier, saying that "subway" implied trolleys while "tunnel" was reserved for trains. That's according, supposedly, to Massachusetts law*; does NJ have a law to the contrary?
And if a "subway" is "supposed" to be for one mode of transportation to the exclusion of another, how is it we have one carrying a road in Pennsylvania, and ones carrying pedestrians the world over?
*n.b.: It should be Acts of 1894, Chapter
548, not 584. I'm not seeing myself where "subway" and "tunnel" are specifically defined, but they are constantly referred to in the Acts as separate and distinct entities. Then again, legal writings often use numerous approximately synonymous terms together, presumably for base-covering purposes.
Quote from: empirestate on November 12, 2015, 02:02:29 PM
Quote from: bzakharin on November 12, 2015, 12:37:31 PM
NJ Transit is trying to de-emphasize the "Newark City Subway" name, especially now that a new all-surface branch to Broad Street Station is part of the system. The entire system is now the "Newark Light Rail" which is also technically more correct, since subways are supposed to be rapid transit services, not trolley/light rail. But colloquially, yes, it's still the subway.
Interesting; that's in direct opposition to the comment (http://www.railroad.net/forums/viewtopic.php?f=65&t=88993#p994624) I referred to earlier, saying that "subway" implied trolleys while "tunnel" was reserved for trains. That's according, supposedly, to Massachusetts law*; does NJ have a law to the contrary?
And if a "subway" is "supposed" to be for one mode of transportation to the exclusion of another, how is it we have one carrying a road in Pennsylvania, and ones carrying pedestrians the world over?
*n.b.: It should be Acts of 1894, Chapter 548, not 584. I'm not seeing myself where "subway" and "tunnel" are specifically defined, but they are constantly referred to in the Acts as separate and distinct entities. Then again, legal writings often use numerous approximately synonymous terms together, presumably for base-covering purposes.
No, I don't have a legal definition, but that's the way people tend to use the term. Wikipedia and Wiktionary agree with me, though official dictionaries do not. See also this discussion: http://www.city-data.com/forum/urban-planning/1513095-can-you-call-underground-light-rail.html
In 1894, there were no streetcar tunnels in Massachusetts, but construction of the Tremont St. subway (opened 1897) may have been underway. Underground heavy rail transit was a ways off. The only railroad tunnels in the Commonwealth at the time would have been for regular heavy rail.
Quote from: The Nature Boy on November 11, 2015, 01:40:19 PM
Quote from: cl94 on November 11, 2015, 12:33:03 PM
Quote from: dfilpus on November 11, 2015, 11:53:13 AM
Quote from: Henry on November 11, 2015, 11:35:36 AM
Quote from: Pete from Boston on November 09, 2015, 04:47:25 PM
Not even the bus rapid transit line is called a subway, because subway necessarily means train here.
Either that or a popular fast-food chain, but I digress. While many large cities do have subway lines, the only one I've ever been aware of that actually describes its system as such is the New York MTA. Other places, like Washington, call it Metro.
Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority uses "Subway". http://www.mbta.com/schedules_and_maps/subway/
Except nobody calls it that. Unless things have changed recently, it's the T.
Expanding slightly outside the US, Toronto's rapid transit lines are referred to as the Subway, both officially and colloquially.
Are there any cities in the US other than New York that colloquially uses the term "subway" for their underground rail line? DC uses Metro.
Locals in Philly refer to the Broad St Line and the depressed portion of the Market-Frankford Line as the subway. (The remainder of the Market-Frankford Line is elevated and referred to as the El.)
Quote from: odditude on November 12, 2015, 04:11:30 PM
Quote from: The Nature Boy on November 11, 2015, 01:40:19 PM
Are there any cities in the US other than New York that colloquially uses the term "subway" for their underground rail line? DC uses Metro.
Locals in Philly refer to the Broad St Line and the depressed portion of the Market-Frankford Line as the subway. (The remainder of the Market-Frankford Line is elevated and referred to as the El.)
The co-routed BART & MUNI Metro line in downtown San Francisco uses the Market Street Subway (which includes several stations that are MUNI-only), and the under-construction MUNI Metro tunnel along 4th and Stockton Streets for the T-Third line is the Central Subway.
I was thinking this thread would be about pedestrian underpasses beneath roads. I can't help but think that stuff like this (https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@51.507841,-0.1271769,3a,26.5y,242.38h,87.9t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sc5lFLwf4oweB7MDF2KcWOQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656).
Quote from: english si on November 12, 2015, 04:42:19 PM
I was thinking this thread would be about pedestrian underpasses beneath roads. I can't help but think that stuff like this (https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@51.507841,-0.1271769,3a,26.5y,242.38h,87.9t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sc5lFLwf4oweB7MDF2KcWOQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656).
It's about them now, at least in areas where the term isn't standard. I had thought there were a good helping of them in the States, but almost nobody here seems to have even heard of them. In fact, I'm surprised (and interested) by the number of remarks that seem to suggest subways can't refer to anything without rails!
iPhone
A section of Fairchild Street in Danville, IL, used to be referred to as "the subway." Streetview (https://www.google.com/maps/@40.1389662,-87.6154561,3a,75y,289.4h,83.38t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sYOpg7j-ZqLTVUd8vSwkMrA!2e0!6s%2F%2Fgeo3.ggpht.com%2Fcbk%3Fpanoid%3DYOpg7j-ZqLTVUd8vSwkMrA%26output%3Dthumbnail%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26thumb%3D2%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D5.7867846%26pitch%3D0!7i3328!8i1664?hl=en)
It has since been replaced by a more conventional overpass.
The Battery Street Tunnel in Seattle (carrying US 99 and later SR 99 at the north end of the viaduct) was once known as the Battery Street Subway. Would have been confusing had the proposed subway here actually been approved and built, but that never happened.
Quote from: Revive 755 on November 12, 2015, 07:56:36 PM
A section of Fairchild Street in Danville, IL, used to be referred to as "the subway." Streetview (https://www.google.com/maps/@40.1389662,-87.6154561,3a,75y,289.4h,83.38t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sYOpg7j-ZqLTVUd8vSwkMrA!2e0!6s%2F%2Fgeo3.ggpht.com%2Fcbk%3Fpanoid%3DYOpg7j-ZqLTVUd8vSwkMrA%26output%3Dthumbnail%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26thumb%3D2%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D5.7867846%26pitch%3D0!7i3328!8i1664?hl=en)
It has since been replaced by a more conventional overpass.
Since the StreetView and Google 3D imagery were captured you mean? Do you have a picture of what replaced it?
Quote from: bzakharin on November 12, 2015, 03:20:24 PM
No, I don't have a legal definition, but that's the way people tend to use the term. Wikipedia and Wiktionary agree with me, though official dictionaries do not. See also this discussion: http://www.city-data.com/forum/urban-planning/1513095-can-you-call-underground-light-rail.html
Quite a few...interesting assertions in that forum thread, huh? :eyebrow:
Anyhow, yeah, I don't think there's any disagreement on what the word means the vast majority of the time in the U.S. My only question was whether by "supposed to" you meant "ought to", implying some kind of prescriptive source like the above-referenced (and evidently unfounded) legal assertion, but I see you just meant "presumed to".
But in its most fundamental sense, there's nothing in the word "subway" that connotes rail travel or even public transit of any mode. It is quite simply "sub-" (meaning "under") + "way" (a way of passage or travel), so any facility that allows any kind of passage by going beneath or below something would be a subway. For many people, the only things they will ever in their lives hear referred to as subways will involve trains, but there's still no semantic requirement that they do.
Quote from: empirestate on November 13, 2015, 01:10:53 AM
Quote from: Revive 755 on November 12, 2015, 07:56:36 PM
A section of Fairchild Street in Danville, IL, used to be referred to as "the subway." Streetview (https://www.google.com/maps/@40.1389662,-87.6154561,3a,75y,289.4h,83.38t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sYOpg7j-ZqLTVUd8vSwkMrA!2e0!6s%2F%2Fgeo3.ggpht.com%2Fcbk%3Fpanoid%3DYOpg7j-ZqLTVUd8vSwkMrA%26output%3Dthumbnail%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26thumb%3D2%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D5.7867846%26pitch%3D0!7i3328!8i1664?hl=en)
It has since been replaced by a more conventional overpass.
Since the StreetView and Google 3D imagery were captured you mean? Do you have a picture of what replaced it?
https://www.google.com/maps/@40.1387781,-87.6140862,3a,29.1y,303.27h,87.8t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sk493k4lc7Hc9tIRJaCVsOg!2e0!7i13312!8i6656
Quote from: empirestate on November 12, 2015, 06:04:51 PM
Quote from: english si on November 12, 2015, 04:42:19 PM
I was thinking this thread would be about pedestrian underpasses beneath roads. I can't help but think that stuff like this (https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@51.507841,-0.1271769,3a,26.5y,242.38h,87.9t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sc5lFLwf4oweB7MDF2KcWOQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656).
It's about them now, at least in areas where the term isn't standard. I had thought there were a good helping of them in the States, but almost nobody here seems to have even heard of them. In fact, I'm surprised (and interested) by the number of remarks that seem to suggest subways can't refer to anything without rails!
Is this exclusive predominantly the case in places with rapid transit subways? It's my experience that where that's the case, that's all "subway" means.
Quote from: Pete from Boston on November 15, 2015, 10:13:36 PM
Quote from: empirestate on November 12, 2015, 06:04:51 PM
Quote from: english si on November 12, 2015, 04:42:19 PM
I was thinking this thread would be about pedestrian underpasses beneath roads. I can't help but think that stuff like this (https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@51.507841,-0.1271769,3a,26.5y,242.38h,87.9t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sc5lFLwf4oweB7MDF2KcWOQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656).
It's about them now, at least in areas where the term isn't standard. I had thought there were a good helping of them in the States, but almost nobody here seems to have even heard of them. In fact, I'm surprised (and interested) by the number of remarks that seem to suggest subways can't refer to anything without rails!
Is this exclusive predominantly the case in places with rapid transit subways? It's my experience that where that's the case, that's all "subway" means.
I'm not sure I quite follow the question, but yes; typically where "subway" means a rapid transit system, it very rarely means a pedestrian undercrossing or a roadway. But apparently the term isn't completely exclusive in those areas, and it's those rare exceptions that I'm specifically looking for here. In fact, it looks like Boston is a good spot to find multiple uses of the term: we've got the parts of the T that are subway, we've got the Harvard Square bus tunnel (an ex-trolley subway), and reports of some pedestrians subways at places like Roslindale station.
What is the nature of the Senate Subway in Washington, DC? Is a train or a walkway that goes underground from the Capitol to the Offices of the US Senate?
Quote from: roadman65 on November 15, 2015, 11:06:29 PM
What is the nature of the Senate Subway in Washington, DC? Is a train or a walkway that goes underground from the Capitol to the Offices of the US Senate?
Both. Train runs alongside the walkway.
Quote from: cl94 on November 15, 2015, 11:08:35 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on November 15, 2015, 11:06:29 PM
What is the nature of the Senate Subway in Washington, DC? Is a train or a walkway that goes underground from the Capitol to the Offices of the US Senate?
Both. Train runs alongside the walkway.
Sounds like the Atlanta Airport.
I guess though for the sake of this topic, Subways are generally for trains and not underground roads, or walkways even though the name could fit it.
Quote from: roadman65 on November 15, 2015, 11:06:29 PM
What is the nature of the Senate Subway in Washington, DC? Is a train or a walkway that goes underground from the Capitol to the Offices of the US Senate?
I just looked at a picture of this for the very first time. It is quite something to see members of the nation's highest deliberative body tooling about in what looks like an amusement park kiddie-train ride.
Quote from: Pete from Boston on November 16, 2015, 09:00:00 AM
Quote from: roadman65 on November 15, 2015, 11:06:29 PM
What is the nature of the Senate Subway in Washington, DC? Is a train or a walkway that goes underground from the Capitol to the Offices of the US Senate?
I just looked at a picture of this for the very first time. It is quite something to see members of the nation's highest deliberative body tooling about in what looks like an amusement park kiddie-train ride.
The House Subway is very similar. Of course, you can't get anywhere near them now with the security restrictions.
Quote from: roadman65 on November 15, 2015, 11:18:46 PM
I guess though for the sake of this topic, Subways are generally for trains and not underground roads, or walkways even though the name could fit it.
For Americans, anyway. What apparently happened is that one or two subways become enormously well-known across the country, and since they happened to be the type that carries trains, it was the train-carrying aspect that became the most closely associated with the word, even though it's not an aspect actually reflected in the term's origin. That's why New Yorkers will refer to elevated portions of the transit system as part of the "subway", even though it isn't underground.
This didn't happen in England, since the word "subway" wasn't widely applied to their version of America's best-known subway. So in that country, I guess the term most often connotes pedestrians tunnels; but in that case it's really the tunnel itself that's evoked by the term rather than the fact that they're generally walked through. That's presumably why Londoners
don't refer to all sidewalks as "subways", even though sidewalks are also walked upon.
The planners of DC's tube system made an effort to get people to say "Metro" because they were afraid the term "subway" would conjure images of New York's system, which was at its nadir in the 1960s and 1970s due to crime and graffiti, and that people would then refuse to ride.
Quote from: 1995hoo on November 16, 2015, 09:30:17 PM
The planners of DC's tube system made an effort to get people to say "Metro" because they were afraid the term "subway" would conjure images of New York's system, which was at its nadir in the 1960s and 1970s due to crime and graffiti, and that people would then refuse to ride.
"Metro" sounds so...um...prissy, as in "we're better than you, so we call it the
metro"
Back to "subways" used by vehicular traffic:
The Fearing Boulevard "Subway" (https://www.google.com/maps/@41.6403831,-83.593643,1257m/data=!3m1!1e3) is a stretch of road in Toledo on US-24 (Old US-25) where the road travels under 7 railroad overpasses (some since abandoned) in less than a mile.
It was built as the Fearing Street Subway a little over 100 years ago, and to my knowledge -- outside of possible streetcars, there has been no trains which traversed Fearing Street.
Quote from: empirestate on November 16, 2015, 06:31:29 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on November 15, 2015, 11:18:46 PM
I guess though for the sake of this topic, Subways are generally for trains and not underground roads, or walkways even though the name could fit it.
For Americans, anyway. What apparently happened is that one or two subways become enormously well-known across the country, and since they happened to be the type that carries trains, it was the train-carrying aspect that became the most closely associated with the word, even though it's not an aspect actually reflected in the term's origin. That's why New Yorkers will refer to elevated portions of the transit system as part of the "subway", even though it isn't underground.
This didn't happen in England, since the word "subway" wasn't widely applied to their version of America's best-known subway. So in that country, I guess the term most often connotes pedestrians tunnels; but in that case it's really the tunnel itself that's evoked by the term rather than the fact that they're generally walked through. That's presumably why Londoners don't refer to all sidewalks as "subways", even though sidewalks are also walked upon.
Indeed, In Boston the first subway (first in the hemisphere) was in fact a cut-and-cover run of a few blocks to get streetcars off the most congested part of Tremont Street. It was not any kind of network of full underground train lines. This fits a little more with the old British sense of the word than our modern idea does.
Quote from: thenetwork on November 16, 2015, 10:30:38 PM
Back to "subways" used by vehicular traffic:
Oh right, I almost forgot. :-)
QuoteThe Fearing Boulevard "Subway" (https://www.google.com/maps/@41.6403831,-83.593643,1257m/data=!3m1!1e3) is a stretch of road in Toledo on US-24 (Old US-25) where the road travels under 7 railroad overpasses (some since abandoned) in less than a mile.
It was built as the Fearing Street Subway a little over 100 years ago, and to my knowledge -- outside of possible streetcars, there has been no trains which traversed Fearing Street.
That looks surprisingly un-subterranean, even imagining all the missing overpasses. From the StreetView, it scarcely seems to dip below grade.
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fvidthekid.info%2Fimghost%2Fcle-w76-w65-e79-subways.jpeg&hash=cb00575ca644082034181232f74f22d86a55383d)
Apparently these underpasses were called subways, and they carried vehicular traffic, but I walked through two of them and they were probably less than 12 feet wide...
Quote from: vtk on November 24, 2015, 04:15:25 PM
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fvidthekid.info%2Fimghost%2Fcle-w76-w65-e79-subways.jpeg&hash=cb00575ca644082034181232f74f22d86a55383d)
Apparently these underpasses were called subways, and they carried vehicular traffic, but I walked through two of them and they were probably less than 12 feet wide...
Gosh, yeah, they do look quite skinny for vehicles! I can't even find the E. 79th St. one; does it still exist?