NEW YORK CENTRAL & HUDSON RIVER RAILROAD NEW YORK CENTRAL RAILROAD PENN CENTRAL RAILROAD CONRAIL
30th Street Branch - New York Terminal District, Hudson Division West Side, Manhattan - Freight Operations West Side Improvement Project High Line

Page 3: Maps; Property, Port Terminals; Track and Valuation

   The following is direct quote from the 1920 Joint Report with Recommendations:

   In 1881, the New York, West Shore & Buffalo Railroad had been planned as one link in a chain of a new transcontinental railroad from New York to San Francisco. This chain was to be comprised of the West Shore; the New York, Chicago and St. Louis Railroad or "Nickel Plate Road"; the Chicago, Milwaukee and St. Paul Railway, the Northern Pacific Railroad; and the Oregon Navigation Company.

   And so it appears, while the Hudson River Railroad engaged in both freight and passenger service, freight was its bread and butter (figuratively and literally!) Otherwise, why would it give up its passenger depot at Chambers and build an exclusive freight terminal?

   It is imperative to keep in mind at this point in time; the New York & Harlem River Railroad, was still a competitor to the Hudson River RR. It would not be until Cornelius Vanderbilt purchased both, that he brought them under the same umbrella a few years after in 1869.

---

. .

As the city population grew, freight traffic grew to keep up with it. And as the city population expanded northward; there arose a conflict.    Trains were now impeding the people and the people were getting run over by trains. This can be somewhat equated to building an airport on the outskirts of the city; and the city grew, it encroached upon the airport, and now its presence has become a nuisance to those closest to it. In most cases, that does not have a fatal outcome - unless of course the plane crashes into some houses, then there is an uproar; and that has happened on several occasions - but no amount of public uproar ever forced an airport to relocate!    When the Hudson River RR railroad was first laid out in the mid-1840's, pretty much everything north of 42nd Street was undeveloped farmland or forest. It was unfathomable at the time that the city would grow north of the demarcation line at 42nd Street. This misconception would come back to haunt the City fathers time and time again - when City Hall was constructed at Chambers Street, it employed cheap brownstone for its north face, as it was expected most residents would not venture north of Chambers Street and not see it often. ("Grand Central", Marshal,1946)    As Manhattan grew in both industry and population; that imaginary demarcation of "the city line" - was subsequently moved from Chambers Street to Canal Street, then to 14th Street, then 34th Street, then 42nd Street (which was why Vanderbilt built Grand Central Terminal there) and well after that, it appears people just gave up on trying to define the city line entirely!    As you can see by the table at right, (Demographia) the population of Manhattan doubled in the thirty years between 1850 (when the railroad on the West Side was first laid out) and 1880; the problem of people getting hit by the trains began making public appearance in the newspapers. Population once again doubled by 1910.    So, as the city population grew, even the slow moving (no more than 6 miles per hour per the city regulation, and escorted) freight trains running down the center of the thoroughfare were found to be involved in a rather growing frequency of serious accidents and fatalities involving pedestrians.	year	population (Manhattan)
	1840	313,000
	1850	516,000
	1860	814,000
	1870	942,000
	1880	1,165,000
	1890	1,441,000
	1900	1,850,000
	1910	2,332,000
	1920	2,284,000
	1930	1,867,000
	1940	1,890,000

---

So called "Death Avenue".

   One of my pet peeves, is that I particularly despise the moniker "Death Avenue" - of which Eleventh Avenue (and Tenth Avenue) became to be called as a result. This "Death Avenue" moniker is a bit of hyperbole and quite sensationalist. Unfortunately, it has become so ingrained throughout the historical accountings of the West Side Operations, that referral to simply "Eleventh Avenue" or "Tenth Avenue" does not carry the same effect. 

   The 1800's and early 1900's - and with them the coming of the Industrial Age - were an inherently dangerous period of time in itself. People were maimed and killed by lots of things in daily life; pedestrians were also run over by horsedrawn wagons on a daily basis or trampled by horses. Riders were thrown.  

   Industry was drastically dangerous: coal mines, steel mills, lumber mills, steam boilers, bridge building, tunnel boring and land work with explosives, mechanized farm equipment, etc. Everyday life then was more of a hazard. 

   In short, injuries and fatalities came from all sorts of machinery and industrial accidents, and not just this particular train or its routing. A "big deal" has been made about the 540 people were known to have been fatally injured by train movements through 1905 by the operations of street running freight trains in Manhattan. 

   But you see, trolley cars caused deaths on the streets as well. These trolleys, so essential to the movement of people to and from work and school; were no different in the hazard they presented. They ran people over too. The Brooklyn Daily Eagle ran a full page feature page on December 30, 1894 blasting the deaths of so many from trolleys. "Frightfully mangled". "Beheaded". "Legs cut off". But no one individual or any holder of city office ever enacted or tried to enact legislation, that forbade the use of trolleys or made them move to another street or part of the city. The trolleys were a public service, you see.

   And when the automobile was developed, entered mass production and became available to the private owner; automobiles increasingly caused death on the streets as well. So many injuries and deaths were occurring as a result of automobiles, that the New York Daily News began a clock-like "Hands of Death." The latest one in 1923 showed 889 people killed by "the automobile". In 1931, deaths as a result from automobiles reached 1,448. Yet, only a few people and politicians actually advocated banning the automobile from streets. Speed limits, perhaps; but not an outright ban. If one does the math, more people died from the automobile in the first 30 years of the 1900's, than in all of the 80 years the freight trains operated on the West Side since 1851.

   But it was the "big, bad freight railroad" that bore the brunt of the blame, and was an easy target. And while people needed the trolleys to go to and from work and school, go about their daily lives and what have you; they were an essential public service. Most transit companies of the era were considered "locally" owned. The perception was (and remains) the freight trains weren't. At best, they might have been incorporated in the State of New York, but their corporate offices may have been out of state.

   And even though the New York Central Railroad's headquarters were located right in New York City by Grand Central Terminal; they, like the other railroads were perceived to be owned by a faceless corporation owned by the ultra-rich, living in mansions along Fifth Avenue; while most of the rest of the population were crammed into tenements.

   The railroads always have and always will bear unjust ire and blame by the public, even to this day:
.

• A tractor trailer driver gets stuck on a crossing that is well marked with signs as a "high center crossing" and a train hits it? Why didn't the train stop?
  (Why wasn't the truck driver better trained or more attentive?)
  .
• Trespassers got run over while walking on tracks? Why didn't the train blow it horn? Why doesn't the railroad build fences?
  (It did and it does.)
  .
• A movie crew (with props no less) tries to film a movie scene on a railroad bridge (with no trespassing signs!) and without permission from the railroad. A train comes along and kills a member of the crew?
  (Sue the railroad for wrongful death!)

   .
   A significant portion of the public outrage comes from the transport of chemicals by rail. Sensationalist media fosters chemophobia.

• A train derails? It must because of shoddy maintenance or faulty equipment.
  (But no matter how well something is maintained or how new, things will break. People vandalize infrastructure.)
  .
  
• A train derails carrying hazardous materials. Hazardous materials through my town!?!?! Absolutely not! Reroute the train to somewhere else. Rip out the railroad lines!
  (But everyday life requires chemicals)
  

• Acetylene, Argon, Carbon Dioxide, Oxygen, Helium: welding and cutting of metals for construction and demolition.
• Ammonia: refrigerant, cleaning agent.
• Anhydrous ammonia: A fertilizer used in agriculture.
• Chlorine: Used for purifying water and producing other chemicals like household bleach.
• Vinyl chloride: A gas used to make plastics, including PVC pipes and conduits.
• Hydrochloric Acid: used in electroplating metals. Combined with other chemicals which becomes innocuous, in the manufacture in pharmaceuticals.
• Sulfuric acid: used in petroleum refining and fertilizer production. Also combined with other chemicals which becomes innocuous, in the manufacture in pharmaceuticals.
• Sodium Hydroxide (Lye): used in paper manufacturing and manufacture of soap and detergents.
• Crude oil: refined into hundreds of products from bitumen used in asphalt for roofing and paving, to motor fuels to, cleaners, plastics.
• Liquified Petroleum Gas (Propane): heating, cooking, drying.
• Acetone: combined with other chemicals which becomes innocuous, in the manufacture in pharmaceuticals; solvents for paints and paint removal
• Alcohol (various forms including ethanol): used for antiseptics and disinfectants, cosmetics & perfumes, a renewable fuel and a fuel additive for reducing pollutants.
• Pesticides. Herbicides. Wood treatments. The list is endless.
  

.
   The computer or smart device you read this on, the products you purchase and consume, use various chemicals which are needed to make plastics; as well as acids, and heavy metals in its construction. Acids are used to etch metals for electrical contacts. Plastics are used in food sales and storage: meats are sold wrapped in plastic for hygienic and sanitary reasons. The list of hazardous chemicals transported by rail, and that by processing become inert and used in our daily lives, is endless.
  
   So in short; accidents, are the inevitable consequences of living in a modern, first world, technologically advanced urban society. An ongoing hullabaloo is made about "bomb trains" which refer to unit trains of ethanol. During the 1960's and 1970's the uproar was over pollutants made by burning gasoline. Ethanol, made from corn; was developed as an alternate and renewable fuel source either by itself or blended with gasoline to reduce those airborne pollutants. Ethanol is manufactured in the Midwest, where the corn is grown, and it needs to be transported to the oil refineries which are usually located on the West, Gulf and East Coasts where oil comes by ship. Yes, these trains sometimes derail and catch fire. So do trucks. But the alternative is the re-introduction of pollutants from the burning of gasoline. 

   This bothers you? What are the options? Going back to living in a cave, hunting for your food daily with a stone or a spear? Hell, even archaeologists have even found primitive man injured by those hunting implements! Point being, injury and death goes hand in hand with living. The more advanced the civilization, the more hazards there are that come about as a result of those advancements.

   Returning to the 1800's; and in the case of the New York Central Railroad back in the 1800's; when that railroad was owned by a very outspoken ultra-millionaire, like it was by William H. Vanderbilt living in a mansion of Fifth Avenue; well, they made for an easy target by the media. The railroads were, and remain to this day; to be perceived as a big faceless uncaring corporations. Not much has changed, has it?

   Despite this, that is not to say solutions and remedies were not attempted back then. One of the solutions to the hazard of operating trains through the city streets, was to have a man on horseback escort the trains during transit on public thoroughfares. Which brings us to our next chapter.
.

.

---

.
.

   The "Tenth Avenue cowboys" entered upon their existence on December 4, 1850 as the result of a city ordinance which read:

"that the Hudson River Railroad Company . . . are permitted to propel their cars from Chambers Street to Thirty-first Street, by their locomotive, or 'Dumb Engines,' upon the condition that the same shall not be run at a greater speed than six miles an hour; and also, that they shall employ a proper person to precede the trains on horse back, to give the necessary warning in a suitable manner of their approach, and be under such further direction as the Common Council may from time to time prescribe."

   Mind you, this is just one paragraph of a multiple page agreement regarding the rights of the Hudson River Railroad to use streets and avenues in Manhattan to convey freight AND passenger trains to Chambers Street Depot. The unabridged text may be read by clicking on the excerpt of legislation above. It contains some very interesting information to say the least regarding which route the railroad had to follow, distances between cars, and other details lost over time. 

   This horse rider was to lead the locomotive movement and warn pedestrians to yield to the oncoming train. An escort if you will. These horse riders became known as a "West Side Cowboy", or a "Dummy Boy" (after the steam dummy). They were also known as the Tenth Avenue (or Eleventh Avenue) Cowboy. And when first established, this rider escorted both passenger trains to Chambers Street AND freight trains.

   You will note in a lot of images; these riders appear quite young. They were - back in those days when a lad was old enough to ride a horse, he was old enough to work. It was not until 1938 that the Fair Labor Standards Act was passed, prohibiting most children under age 16 from working (with exception to agriculture and domestic labor). So a lot of young men, no older than their early teens; were seen at work and this position was no exception. 

two image above and one below Bain News Service  / George Grantham Bain collection Library of Congress added 05 April 2024	unknown provenance

.

   The following film, converted to digital format, shows several of the West Side Cowboys at work escorting the trains. The following digital video from the blog "LivinTheHighLine" article titled "The West Side Cowboy and the High Line", (www.livinthehighline.com/the-original-urban-cowboy/).

   This image below, coincidentally visually exemplifies how pedestrians got injured or killed on the streets on their own accord. In this image we clearly see an escort to the train with red flag warning the public about the oncoming train (moving at no more that 6 miles an hours per City ordinance); yet in that brief span of time between that escorts passing and the train following behind, a Department of Street Cleaning (predecessor to the Department of Sanitation) street sweeper and a pedestrian are crossing in front of the train. This was a decision - sometimes a fatal decision - made by the individual to take that risk. This is an exhibition of free will. And it was not the railroads fault.

.

.

---

.    


   Thereupon the Legislature of 1911, by chapter 777, directed the New York Central & Hudson River Railroad Company to file before October 1 of that year; plans to show how it would remove its tracks, and authorized the Board of Estimate and Apportionment to enter into negotiations with the railroad to effect this. The situation then, in short was this: the City is trying to get the railroad off of its public streets; and the railroad company is trying to improve its freight terminal facilities. The question was, how can these two ends be attained and the interests of each conserved in fairness to those of the other?

   So, the new plan was thus: tracks to be placed in a roofed cut, designed to carry a motor parkway above, from Spuyten Duyvil to West 72nd Street, and then an elevated steel girder structure from 72nd to St. John's Park. But it was also stipulated that the trains be drawn only by electric locomotive after 1915, which the entire project was to be completed by 1917. 

   The railroad and the city were getting close, but no cigar. Back to the table they went in 1916. Now it was proposed (from north to south): a tunnel under Spuyten Duyvil Creek (Harlem River) to a six track roofed cut to West 60th Street, then a four track elevated from West 60th Street to a point just south of St. John's Park, and an extension to Cortlandt Street carried on a viaduct above West Street and the bulkhead line. The railroad also took the moment to suggest enlarging their existing freight yards, and while they were at it; a provision for passenger service to the West Side to help alleviate the load from Grand Central Terminal. Total estimated cost? $65,000,000 dollars ($2,010,000,000 in 2024 dollars). Both parties agreed.


   

.


.


   Note that in the following two images, the tracks are significantly lower in elevation than that of the buildings. It was not like the trains were at their front door like in Hell's Kitchen or Chelsea. Also, when the trees were in bloom, the sight line changed, blocking more of the railroad from sight. Apparently this was not enough.


..

.



.

.


   Not so fast! In June 1917, the State Legislature in Albany first nullified that agreement, and second; required all future plans be submitted for review by an "impartial committee" and approval by the Public Service Commission (a State agency)

   The New York Central had been at the bargaining table with the City and State, because the City and the State of New York wanted the Central's railroad operations off the public streets as well as out of Riverside Park.

   By know, there were actually two battles being fought under the encompassing West Side Improvement Project:

• remove or relocate railroad operations from New York City streets on and along Twelfth, Eleventh and Tenth Avenues (Hell's Kitchen / Chelsea; and,
• remove, relocate and hide railroad operations through Riverside Park.
  

    Make no mistake, the New York Central wanted their operations off the streets of lower Manhattan as well; and as the City owned the streets, there was little recourse. As for the Riverside Park vicinity, the Central apparently owned it rights of way through portions of the park.

   When it came to who was going to pay for these "improvements", the railroad accepted the fact they would have to pay for most of it, but they rightfully were not going to pay for all of it.

   And the issue wasn't simply about money. There were also matter of property ownership and rights involved. The Central had property and rights that the City wanted, particularly through Riverside Park. The City had property and rights that the Central needed to relocate their tracks. The City; or more accurately, the community boards and resident organizations; were adamant about not giving up a square inch; "the parkland must be preserved."

   This left the railroad in a position frequently known as being between a rock and hard place. It could not relocate without some acquisition of land, and the City wanted the railroad to give up a lot of what it owned in the name of community improvements. The affluents that resided along Riverside Drive were adamant about not giving up and city parkland for the railroad, but yet they wanted the railroad to move. That is pretty much it in a nutshell.

   One of the more succinct outlines of the issue comes from the following document: West Side Improvement - 22nd Annual Report of the American Scenic & Historical Preservation Society - 1917
 but I warn you, its 32 pages in length. That demonstrates how complicated the issue was.

   And in April, the United States entered World War I and changed the priorities for several years. But, while both minor dithering between the City and the Railroad commenced, and some major dithering in Europe; the freight demands of Manhattan was growing at an exponential rate.

   Thus began over a decade of negotiations, plans, counter-plans, court hearings and compromises; before an actual shovelful of dirt was moved. The specific details are contained within the following three references (the first two of which are open source):

Documents of the Assembly of the State of New York - 1917 (commencing on page 252)

Report of the Commission to Investigate the Surface Railroad Situation in the City of New York - 1918

The Port of New York, Volume 1 and Volume 2, by Carl W. Condit - 1981

   As I pour over documents and the more I witness; the railroad (as greedy as railroads could be) was really at the negotiating table trying to make the West Side Improvement Project(s) work. With every change of City and / or State administration however, the politicians wanted more "givebacks" by the railroad and less "give in's" by the City. This is to say nothing of how the City of New York was going to finance their share of the improvements.

   As a result, many different plans were put forth over that period of time from 1909 through 1920. Some within reasonable expectations, some purely in outer space.
.

.

   In April 1920, Alfred H. Smith put the case quite succinctly in an address at the Merchants Association of New York City:  

"Manhattan Island lives on a hand to mouth existence. Because of the dearth of warehouses and storage facilities and of modern equipment for handling freight. The unnecessary costs and losses yearly are prodigious; [and] none but a rich and growing city could have borne the burden."

   In other words, because of the warehouses and storage facilities on the island, the City feeds and clothes itself from outside supplies. Remove the railroad, and you remove the warehouses and industries and income for thousands of people who work at these facilities. Remove that and the city withers. This statement followed another in which the endless delays of the City and State of New York was criticized and the United States Railroad Administration refusing to grant increases in freight rates, comparable to those in wages. It was in short, a statement made to the effect of "shit or get off the pot."

   One plan put forth, had the railroad completely sub-grade starting with a tunnel that went under the Harlem River and Spuyten Duyvil; all the way to at least, the West 30th Street Yards. The plan was for the City to build the tunnel, with freight stations alongside the route, and they would lease the railroad yearly rights to operate their trains there. 

   Another plan was for an elevated railroad from Spuyten Duyvil to West 72nd Street, then enter a subway with service through the basements to those buildings desiring such service. Much like todays passenger carrying subways in New York City, only substituting people for freight.

   A more realistic plan was retain the existing bridge at Spuyten Duyvil, with the tracks sub-grade from there to West 60th Street; then an elevated line from West 60th Street to St. John's Park. 

   Two of the more audacious plans were outlined in the New York, New Jersey Port and Harbor Development Commission Joint Report with Comprehensive Plan and Recommendations - 1920; on pages 231 and 239.

It was suggested that a two to four standard gauge railroad loop system be constructed, approximately 18 miles in circumference; utilizing electric locomotives.    One of these plans (the diagram at right) would operate through an extensive underground tunnel network to and from Manhattan, with no less than 10 small yards along the West Side of Manhattan, from the Battery north to about West 40th Street, where the tunnel returned back west to New Jersey and that connected with a new "Joint Yard" standard gauge freight yards in New Jersey.     There would be a spur north to West 60th Street, but the New York Central would have to give up their yards at West 30-36th Streets (east west oriented), for two yards a little further north that were oriented north- south (numbers 11 and 12) in diagram at right.    The other plan (seen at left) substituted the tunnel system for an elevated railway beginning with a helix at the Battery to transition the tunnel to an elevated line. (Think Lincoln Tunnel helix). This elevated built to four track width, and sometimes even six tracks; would proceed up the West Side of Manhattan; where "union terminals" would be constructed about every 5 to 10 blocks.    These terminals would have second story railroad yards (think Morgan Parcel Post Building only much larger), with trucks and motor freight at ground level, and the freight storage and industrial occupants from the third story and  above. Diagrams show both truck elevators as well as freight car elevators to bring either to the appropriate floor above for loading or unloading.    At approximately West 40th Street, another helix would bring the elevated tracks down to the tunnel to cross the Hudson River and back to New Jersey.

   The estimated cost of the elevated plan, was $262,000,000 (adjusted for inflation for 2025: $4,244,085,600). The tunnel proposal was estimated to cost $250,000,000 (2025: $4,050,000,000 - and I haven;t quite figured out how the tunnel plan was cheaper than the elevated - tunneling is always more expensive. A similar plan to these, yet substituting cable driven narrow gauge carts is also shown on page 269. Well, one can dream, no?

   From what I gather from the synopsis of the following document, it really wasn't the railroads fault. Each City administration wanted "their vision" to be the one that was implemented. Then, with each City agency that became involved, no one really knew who had jurisdiction:

"In 1911 (chapter 777 of laws of 1911) the West side Improvement was made the subject of special legislation, and the carrying out of the improvement was left generally for direct action between the City authorities and the railroad company. Under the Mitchel Administration plans for carrying out the West Side Improvement were developed in great detail, but at the last the proposed arrangement failed of approval. In 1917, the special legislation of 1911 was amended to confer certain jurisdiction of the (state) Public Service Commission for First District (chapter 719, laws of 1917).

The statutory authority now is so confused that little can be down until that confusion is eliminated.

Following the failure of accomplishment under the Acts of 1911 and 1917, the City Administration began litigation to test the title of the railroad company to the property occupied by its tracks. This litigation resulted unfavorably to the City (City of New York vs. New York Central R. R. Co., 234 N. Y. 113).

Toward the close of 1923 the New York Central Railroad Company made application to the Transit Commission for the elimination of all the crossings on the West Side under the provisions of the Railroad Law. The Commission found that the confused legal situation, coupled with the lack of adequate State appropriations, prevented effective action.

On December 19, 1924, the Transit Commission adopted an order denying in general the application of the Company except in so far as it related to grade crossings in the Manhattanville district, which includes the approaches to the ferry terminals at 125th Street (Fort Lee Ferry) Ferry) and at Dyckman Street. The Commission, subject to the appropriation by the State of the necessary funds, ordered the elimination of 10 grade crossings in the neighborhood of 125th and Dyckman Streets which, it estimates, will cost approximately $4,000,000.

   On another front, an agreement would be reached, whereas the State of New York was to pay one quarter of the cost of this grade separation / realignment project, the New York Central Railroad was to pay three quarters. And true to fashion, the State of New York balked, stating it did not have the funds to cover their full 25% portion. With surprising congeniality and good faith, the New York Central Railroad offered to cover the States' portion and defer reimbursement arrangements and repayment to a later date. Not surprisingly, I cannot locate any documentation alluding that the State finally paying its due share of apportionment, but it may have been paid in installments or reduced taxation.

   Then a plan arose that a double decker highway and railroad elevated be constructed. This plan would eliminated most of the grade crossings on Twelfth Avenue, but did little to ameliorate the issue between the pedestrians and horse drawn traffic at street level at Midtown. This plan amounted to only the Miller or West Side Elevated Highway being built for automobile traffic only.

   So, back to the bargaining table they went. The goals of all were to get the trains off the street, and who was going to cover the municipality's fair share of fiscal responsibility. ..


.

   In 1923; the State of New York reviewed the proposals and the New York Central Railroad now proposed the following: a new line of 11 miles in length consisting of the following: a new swing bridge at Spuyten Duyvil (eliminating the expensive tunneling) a roofed cut through Riverside Park, expansion of the existing freight yards, a viaduct from West 72nd Street to a completely new freight terminal located south of Spring Street and the razing of the old St. John Park's Terminal.

   And now yet comes another monkey wrench gets thrown into the West Side Improvement plans.
.

.

---

 

   Put into the simplest terms; the Kaufman Electrification Act of 1923, ratified by the New York State Assembly; was the act that mandated that all railroads located in the City of New York City be electrified by January 1, 1926, and by proxy tried to eliminated steam locomotives.

   All legislations prior to the Kaufman Act, were restrictions specific to a certain location and / or a particular operation in Manhattan, but not the entire borough.

   A great deal of misinformation exists about the Kaufman Electrification Act, or simply "the Kaufman Act". This misinformation circulates both in general discussion of New York City history, as well as within railroad historical contexts. All too often, it's simply stated "steam locomotives were banned in Manhattan in 1908, blah blah blah". This is simply not true.

   So, like most things on this website; the page concerning the Kaufman Act and the previous acts became quite lengthy and detailed; and in discussing that history, it was necessary to move it to its own page:

   Being that the Kaufman Act bears a great deal on the history of the New York Central's operations in Manhattan, I cannot suggest strenuously enough, that that history needs to be read.

   I will attempt to address the high points here however, but a few paragraph synopsis will not convey the details as much as I would like them to.

   Now, the New York Central was essential fighting a multi-front war:

• the Riverside Park problem;
• trying to figure who had jurisdiction for the West Side Improvement Project; 
• grade crossing elimination / street operations in Hell's Kitchen and Chelsea.
• the Kaufman Act demanding electrification or cessation of steam locomotive operations in the City of New York;

   The Kaufman Act as ratified by State of New York on June 2, 1923; was now demanding electric operation of all trains within the City limits of New York by January 1, 1926: yard, passenger, freight, main line, switching, everything. This Act appears to have been an end run around the West Side Improvement Project process, which was taking forever through city agencies. In short, so many city agencies were involved, it became confused as to who had jurisdiction.

   The Kaufman Act, a state act; started with only electrifying the New York Central trackage north of West 72nd Street running through Riverside Park. But within weeks, it morphed into dictating policy for every railroad in the City of New York, not just in Manhattan; and it attempted to force them to use a single type of power: electric.

   Governor Smith signed the Act "as is": the Kaufman Act as written and ratified, provided for no time extensions, and for all railroads to be fully compliant by January, 1, 1926, with electric locomotives. Any railroad not in compliance was to receive a $5,000 per day, per occurrence fine. It was heavy handed and ham fisted. Obviously, the railroads had something to say about this.

   Multiple railroads operating freight terminals in the City of New York vehemently objected to the Kaufman Act, and the most outspoken of all was the New York Central; as most of their trackage was in the streets. The use of a ground level electric third rail was not feasible (unless you wanted to electrocute some residents on a daily basis - the cure was more deadly than the disease); overhead trolley wire had already been forbidden in the City for two reasons: the foremost was due to stray electric current finding its way through gas mains and prematurely corroding them; the second was out of a concern about telephone and telegraph wires falling on the trolley wire and transferring the high voltage to a telephone / telegraph handset.

    Electric battery locomotives were not sufficiently advanced to consider for heavy freight use, and neither were compressed air, fireless steam or gas mechanical locomotives. Think about this: here we are in 2024, 100 years later, and battery locomotives still are not reliable enough to warrant widespread use or acceptance in a freight railroad capacity!

   The first amendment to the original Act, dated 1924 and filed by Kaufman; was nothing more than to expand the regulation: from the City of New York (Manhattan, the Bronx, Brooklyn, Queens and Staten Island) to now include neighboring parts of Westchester County: Yonkers, Mount Vernon and New Rochelle. Obviously, this amendment was not in the railroads' favor.

   On December 31, 1925, a temporary injunction sought by the railroads was issued, based on the unconstitutionality of the Kaufman Act. The railroads maintained that the excessive fines were tantamount to violations of unlawful seizure. In addition to this, they also stated the federal Interstate Commerce Commission had until this point be the ruling agency regarding locomotives and safety appliances. The injunction was granted with decision reserved (to be decided at later date).

   This temporary injunction was made permanent on March 26, 1926; the Federal Government had jurisdiction over locomotives and interstate commerce, not the State of New York. It did however dismiss the claim about unlawful seizure.

   The second amendment to the Kaufman Act, ratified in May 18, 1926; was in favor of the railroads, and it granted them a five year extension for compliance with the Act. Contrary to public misconception, this second amendment was not about adding diesel-electric locomotives to the list of approved power sources. The amendment was strictly to provide a five year extension to the 1926 effective date.

   The diesel-electric locomotive was becoming a viable alternative to steam and electric propulsion, and provided a means for the railroads to comply, and was recognized as such by the chief engineer of the Public Service Commission, William C. Lancaster. He recognized this new form of motive power. The Public Service Commission was the state agency responsible for enforcing the Kaufman Act.

"The Diesel electric locomotive... has none of the objectionable features of the steam locomotive; it is substantially noiseless and its movement are virtually the same as those of the electric locomotive of the same capacity.  It has one other feature... which has an advantage over the overhead system of contact or the third rail. in the case of the latter, there are frequent momentary discontinuances which draw arcs causing vivid flashes. These are a source of annoyance and would be objectionable to those living along Riverside Drive. The results where the contact shoe jumps from one conductor to another and such intervals would be frequent in the third rail system."

.
   Fortunately, the State was now knocked out of the box by the federally issued injunction. And despite the State granting a 5 year extension for compliance; the railroads maintained their steadfast opposition to the Act.

   Let us turn back the calender a little to 1924; a prototype General Electric - Ingersoll Rand model X3-1 locomotive, better known by its construction number: #8835; was fitted with an inline six cylinder (10" x 12" cylinders) diesel engine constructed by Ingersoll-Rand utilizing the Price-Rathbun design and solid injectors. This engine in turn powered an electrical generator designed by General Electric. This in turn supplied electricity to traction motors with voltage and current being regulated using controls designed a few year prior by Hermann Lemp of General Electric. The carbody was a left over, laying around at General Electric's Erie, PA facility.

  #8835 would be "unveiled" on February 28, 1924 to the representatives of the railroads showing interest in a diesel locomotive: Baltimore & Ohio, Pennsylvania, Boston & Maine, New York Central, Reading & Lehigh Valley. While the men were impressed, they remained unconvinced of the design which had not yet seen day to day service.

   So, beginning in June 1924, and for the next thirteen months, the unit went through rigorous (and to some extent, abusive) testing on ten different railroads and three industries (to which the locomotive had been leased on a trial basis). #8835 would come to spend 2½ months operating on the West Side of Manhattan along Tenth and Eleventh Avenues for the New York Central Railroad, the most out of all the locations it would be tested at:

Ingersoll-Rand / General Electric Demonstrator #8835 - sometime between June 9 and August 23, 1924 
Tenth Avenue, Manhattan, NY
from Diesel Spotters Guide, Jerry Pinkepank / Kalmbach Publishing

hours of service	dates of service	remarks
833	6/9/1924 to 8/23/1924	Placed in yard switching service (New York City West Side Yards) on July 19th for a daily recording of performance data. In one test phase, this unit was operated for 24 hours per day (almost continuously), handling 3 shifts daily from 7/24 to 8/7. Inspection of the locomotive could only occur during crew changes. On 8/14 a "Tonnage Test" was conducted: #8835 pulled "93 loaded freight cars on level track" for 36 minutes. 1, 2 Note: The Ingersoll-Rand record does not indicate what these loads consisted of or total tonnage pulled.

   At midpoint of its testing on the 'Central; this locomotive was placed into a "tug-of-war"  test with one of the a Shay type locomotives of New York Central working the West Side Line; in which 8835 won that battle due to smoother torque of the electric drive and greater coefficient of friction; and a little overzealousness on the part of the Shay's engineer, who got the Shay's wheel's slipping. Needless to say, the Central's men were very impressed, as well as the other railroads.

   Most of the railroads that were going to be effected by the Kaufman Act, placed orders for the A/GE/IR switcher. But the New York Central held off committing.

   As stated, the Central Railroad of New Jersey received their A/GE/IR Boxcab and placed it into service on November 2, 1925. THEN the second amendment to the Kaufman Act took place on December 31.

   With a successful injunction in their pockets, and holding off the demanded changes stipulated by the Kaufman legislation by 1926; the railroads continued the legal battle to invalidate the Kaufman Act.

   Perhaps the Governor of New York, Alfred Smith; either was astute enough on his own (or had some cronies whisper in his ear) that perhaps the Kaufman legislation as written, was flawed as the railroads had been stating. This is because Smith first vetoed a measure the previous year requesting an extension, because

"the railroads had nearly a year to demonstrate they were attempting to comply with the provisions,"

    however, but this time around, Governor Smith approved the amendment because, as he stated:

"that the task imposed upon the railroads is a difficult one because it involves not only the question of electrification but also that of the grade crossing removal."

   The US Statutory Court found the Kaufman Act unconstitutional. The specific reason was the Federal Interstate Commerce Commission (ICC) had jurisdiction over locomotive use on railroad operations, on the grounds they constituted interstate commerce, and that the ICC had already legislated various safety appliance regulations on and for the railroads. That meant the State of New York did not have authority to determine what type of locomotive could or could not operate. The City of New York belonged to the State of the New York, the State of New York belonged to the United States of America.

   And so, on September 9, 1926; the US Statutory Court, with the Honorable Learned Hand presiding, along with two other judges; stayed the injunctions against the Kaufman Act permanently. In light of this, the State of New York formally repealed the Kaufman Act in 1930. (there are other events proceeding this, but have no reflection on the New York Central, so if you are in fact interested in learning about them, please go to the Steam Locomotive Legislation and Regulations in and around the City of New York page itself.

   With the federal court staying the injunction against the Kaufman Act; the other railroads could now breath a sigh of relief; but the New York Central was not out of the woods. It was still locked in a battle called West Side Improvement Project - getting the trains off the streets.

   Now quite a few of you will ask, if the railroads were no longer bound by the Kaufman Act, why did they switch to diesel locomotives? Economy. Ease of operation. Ease of maintenance. Equal power to that of steam, perhaps even better. And the New York Central and New York City made a gentleman's agreement - the New York Central would remove steam locomotives in Manhattan by 1931. And so the electrified the West Line from Spuyten Duyvil to West 72nd Street by 1931. Electrification south of West 72nd Street however, would take until 1934 to get accomplished.

   With that explained, let us get return to the Riverside issue of the West Side Improvement Project.

---

..
.

.
   Upon undertaking research for this particular chapter, I found myself inundated with hits and results of newspaper articles about the struggle to get a plan, any plan; approved.  What is particularly interesting to read, in several of the articles was the moderation as willingness to negotiate of the part of the Central. And as you will read for yourself, it was the shenanigans and lack of unified jurisdiction between the City agencies that kept delaying things.

   Please keep in mind that most of the newspaper articles shown below were published the day after a proceeding or vote took place.

November 28, 1929
February 9, 1929 - First appraisals of grade crossing elimination work to be performed: $29,600,000 and a tentative agreement
	February 21, 1929 - Order to eliminate West Side crossings between St. John's Park Freight Terminal and West 155th Street. Costs now $30,700,000. $12,280,000 by the State of New York, $3,070,000 by the City of New york, and $15,350,000 by the New York Central Railroad. And the railroad approved these appraisals. . .
March 11, 1929 - William Bullock, director of City Affairs Bureau of the New York County Republican Committee; accuses the City Administration and the New York Central Railroad of a "land grab." Proof that opposition and delays were not always perpetrated by the railroad. . .	March 12, 1929 - Mayor Walker repudiates William Bullock's claim. Also, note last paragraph: "I am surprised at the moderation of the New York Central's demands, and the modesty with which they have been put forth."
March 14, 1929 - William Bullock, repeats his accusations.	March 15, 1929 - Bullock states President of the New York Central Railroad Patrick Crowley is claiming the railroad does not own the land, that in reality the City does. . .
March 22, 1929 - NYCRR First Vice President Charles C. Paulding states the railroad owns land, but is giving up property amounting to 6 acres and the air rights to 16 more to the City of New York. .	March 23, 1929 - Proving enough is never enough; now the Washington Heights Taxpayers Association is demanding a roof over the West 135th Street Yard. Pipe dream. .. .
April 1, 1929 - The Transit Commission reallocates funding to reduce the City's cost of the grade crossing elimination by $828,000 and pushes more of the financial burden onto New York State.	April 30, 1929 - A revised tentative agreement by the Board of Estimate consulting engineer, Arthur S. Tuttle; states a six year time line for grade crossing removal. Also note that this agreement specifies the use of steam locomotives is to be discontinued north of West 72nd Street within two years of the agreement. Which reinforces the conclusion to my research that the Kaufman Act was no longer in effect. Why discontinue something that is already banned? . ..
May 6, 1929 - The West Side Plan comes up for informal discussion. One of the points for discussion is use of street trackage to access the terminal warehouse located at West 28th Street between eleventh and Twelfth Avenues. In giving up its trackage on Eleventh, the railroad would like to use and easement on Twelfth Avenue instead. Also, it is reiterated that the New York Central has to give up steam locomotive use within two years, and to cease street operation between Canal and West 60th Streets within five years; after the agreement is reached. . .
May 7, 1929 - Another hearing for another revision. . .
May 10, 1929 - City experts at odds over placement of Parkway: either on roof of railroad right of way or along the shore line. While not directly impacted the railroad portion of the plan; this article demonstrates the conflicts of various issues amongst the various City agencies. Each wanted their own vision. . .
May 1, 1929 - Steady progress in planning. And the City is shirking off more of the cost of the grade crossing elimination costs onto the State.	May 11, 1929 - Discussion of West Side Improvement aesthetics. . .
May 14, 1929 - Estimate Board defers vote for one week.
	May 21, 1929 - West Side Improvement Project ready for vote.
	intentionally left blank
May 28, 1929 - Vote postponed another week: where to put the parkway, where to put the playgrounds... . .
June 4, 1929 - YAY! The City Estimate Board votes yes! One City agency down, how many more to go? . .
June 7, 1929 - West Side Plan formally ratified!	June 8, 1929 - Transit Board fixed a date for public hearing on grade crossing elimination. . .
June 11, 1929 - Appraisers report on West Side Plan - balance in City's favor of almost $6,000,000. Also allows additional sidings at Tenth Avenue & West 14th and 15th Streets . .
June 13, 1929 - City to rule today on Riverside Plan . .
June 14, 1929 - West Side Plan passes Estimate Board. City agencies still arguing over placement of highway. . .
June 22, 1929 - Transit Commission votes on West Side Plan, gives formal approval. . .	July 2, 1929 - Public Service Board acts on electrification of New York Central trackage north of West 72th Street and Spuyten Duyvil and grade crossing elimination.
July 3, 1929 - West Side Plan wins final City vote. Estimate Board removes last obstacle to Riverside Improvement. And another voice in opposition: Henry H. Klein, an attorney. . .
July 4, 1929 - Ugh. Back to this argument: Mayor Walker denied that the City was giving the New York Central Railroad land worth $250,000,000.	July 5, 1929 - Klein still rambling on. . .
	intentionally left blank
July 6, 1929 - The contract is Signed!! 40 years in the making. The City of New York and the New York Central reach an official agreement to eliminate grade crossings in Manhattan. Klein, who threatened to serve papers on Mayor Walker was nowhere to be found. . .
July 13, 1929 - Now it is the Central's turn to beg for money. Apparently if it started work earlier, it would get a lower interest rate on the loan. . .
Era of New Splendor Opens for West Side - July 14, 1929
. .
July 15, 1929 - Ugh! Not this Klein guy again.	August 30, 1929 - New York Central orders 35 oil-electric switchers from American Locomotive. . .
December 12, 1929 The West Side Plan wins approval from federal Interstate Commerce Commission. Cost of project now $137,737,000  with $120,872,800 to be paid by the railroad. It should be noted, that prior to reaching this decision on December 12; a very note worthy event took place - the Stock Market crash in October 1929 - and the start of the Great Depression. A lot of the work on the West Side Improvement Project in the coming years, excavation, moving soil and rock and grading in Riverside Park is going to performed by persons enrolled in the Works Progress Administration. . .
	intentionally left blank
December 20, 1929 First contract awarded to Arthur McMullen Company for rearrangement of trackage at south end of West 60th-72nd Street Yard. Also, the Milk Yard to be relocated to West 60th Street; and allow the Morgan Parcel Post Building to be constructed. . .
West Side Improvement Projects Advancing Rapidly - November 29, 1931

.

.
.

.
.

.
   Once this was agreed upon, the new right of way was excavated, graded and the new trackage laid. The original plan as designed, is described as comparable to a two level Roman aqueduct without the tall support columns: the trains would run through along the bottom level, and automobiles on the top level. Pedestrian tunnels built at regular intervals under the railroad tracks would grant residents access to the waterfront.was to build stone walls with arches on the west side of the railroad right of way, with Romanesque arches that intervals to allow the tunnel to ventilate. The east side wall would be solid stone or concrete. Steel I beams would be laid across on top, and when paved over, a roadway was planned to run along the top of the tunnel:


.

.
   Work between 72nd and 79th Streets was well underway in 1934 when Robert Moses was appointed City of New York Parks Commissioner; and he put an immediate halt to the project calling it a "visionary scheme." His view was that the highway on top of the tunnel would divide the residents from the park and waterfront, despite the many pedestrian tunnels that were planned to run under the tracks giving those residents access to the shoreline.

.

   His plan was move the highway to the very shoreline itself (which was one of the original sticking points to approving the Project back in 1929). This in effect defeated the very purpose of burying the railroad to give residents access to the shore to begin with! Moses would however retain the railroad tunnel and cover it with earth making additional parkland or pedestrian paths, tennis courts and recreation areas. The City approved this $11,000,000 plan with little to no opposition (anyone surprised?)

   And so construction resumed. Concrete walls were poured to either side of the tracks, covered with an I-beam and back filled with earth, thereby making a tunnel.


.
   The shoreline was landfilled as planned and greatly expanding the park area; only to be consumed by the Henry Hudson Parkway. All of this construction was completed by 1941.
.
.

.
   The railroad tunnel still exists to this day. A connection was built at West 36th Street to Penn Station in 1986; however the trackage would remain unused by any railroad for several more years. As a result, the tunnel become a home to itinerant homeless persons; as well as graffiti artists who used the large walls as canvases and paint some rather nice murals. At this point the tunnel took on the name "Freedom Tunnel".

   On April 7, 1991; Amtrak shifted its long distance and regional service from Grand Central Terminal trains to Penn Station. This would include the following services: "Adirondack", "Berkshire Flyer", "Empire Service", "Ethan Allen Express", "Lake Shore Limited" and "Maple Leaf". The homeless persons living in the tunnel were forced out (some managed to keep this their home and remain until 1994), at which time the last "official" tenant left, but it is still used covertly by the homeless.


   

.

Milk cans were usually embossed with the name of the farm "Elgin" (of the Catskills), or the cooperative that the farm belonged to
Dairyman's League (DairyLea) or the dairy company:
Crowley, Sheffield, Queensboro, etc

Painted numbers were used to track the can and either painted letters or embossed tags for the railroad which carried it and the milepost that can was dropped off and received from.

U&D - 51 (Ulster & Delaware MP51 - Kelly Corners)

O&W - New York Ontario & Western Rwy

NYC - New York Central, etc.

Ergo, this can is marked NYC, for New York Central.

West 21st Street and Tenth Avenue (looking west) - July 7, 1931
Church of Guardian Angels. In less than two years, the High Line will be built behind the church.
New York Public Library Digital Archives
P. L. Sperr photo
added 19 August 2025

Tenth Avenue & West 17th Street (looking northwest) - April 2, 1929
United States Trucking Corp.
New York Public Library Digital Archives
P. L. Sperr photo
added 19 August 2025

Tenth Avenue & West 17th Street (looking east-southeast) - July 16, 1932
New York Public Library Digital Archives
P. L. Sperr photo
added 19 August 2025