Road subways

[empirestate]

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?

[froggie]

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.

[TEG24601]

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

[wphiii]

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

[Pete from Boston]

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).

[empirestate]

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).

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.

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.

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...)

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).

Are any of the non-rail transit facilities actually called "subway", or is the term reserved 100% for trains in the U.S.?

[Pete from Boston]

Not even the bus rapid transit line is called a subway, because subway necessarily means train here.

[TheStranger]

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

[empirestate]

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 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"?

[vtk]

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.

[empirestate]

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. :-)

[Henry]

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.

[dfilpus]

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/

[empirestate]

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

[cl94]

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.

[The Nature Boy]

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.

[empirestate]

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."

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.

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

[Pete from Boston]

Except 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."

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."

[empirestate]

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!

[Pete from Boston]

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."

[Duke87]

If we're allowing examples from any form of transportation not involving trains, I submit the following:


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.

[bzakharin]

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."

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.

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.

[Pete from Boston]

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."

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.

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." 

[empirestate]

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 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.

[bzakharin]

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 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