Comments on: The subway expansion that never came to be

By: Bill

Bill — Thu, 26 Nov 2009 06:32:02 +0000

I agree with Sal. Connecting the Mahatan subway with the SIRT will reduce or eliminate the need for the ferry, which is dengerouly overcrowded in the summer months. And that Second Avenue line is needed. big-time!

By: Sal

Sal — Thu, 12 Nov 2009 01:31:39 +0000

They really need to connect Staten Island to the subway system already. Enough is enough.

By: R2ro

R2ro — Thu, 05 Jun 2008 19:34:19 +0000

Mr. Kabak:

Actually, I think this would be a great mini (not mega) project to take on:

Echoing paulb’s posting, it would be most helpful to see figures for building out the IRT, BRT/BMT, IND in TODAY’S dollars and compare them to say, Second Ave. Subway

By: Cap'n Transit

Cap'n Transit — Thu, 05 Jun 2008 19:16:40 +0000

Boris, I do see that site relatively frequently from the N train, and I don’t usually see anyone working there. But apparently they’ve managed to dig from 63rd Street almost to Grand Central, and those big piles of gravel in the middle of the Yards all came out of there.

I’m not saying there’s no corruption. I just don’t think it’s the biggest factor. The improvements I’m suggesting would be a lot cheaper than the Second Avenue Subway or East Side Access.

By: paulb

paulb — Thu, 05 Jun 2008 16:05:42 +0000

I wonder just how much more expensive building subways is today, in real $$. It’s always been a tremendously expensive undertaking. The construction of the IND during the 20s was plagued, riddled, fraught, infected with corruption and waste, as was the entire city government. It was during the Walker administration and there was a saying at the time, “The city may not have gotten the subway it paid for, but it certainly paid for the subway it got.”

By: Boris

Boris — Thu, 05 Jun 2008 13:57:58 +0000

Cap’n Transit, you should come see this site (east-side access at Queens Plaza), if you haven’t already. It’s one horrific mess. From what I understand (and I’ve spoken with one of the workers on the site), there’s no chance of finishing this on time.

As far as higher costs, other countries deal with this as well — including other cities in the US! — yet are able to build subways quite a bit cheaper than New York. I agree with Scott C that we are mired in graft.

An analogous point: the BQE has been under continuous construction my entire life, for 40 years. Again, most of the time you just see construction, half-done, for a year or three, until they get around to it again.

As far as corruption in NYC public works, just take a look at the NY Times search engine…

By: Todd

Todd — Thu, 05 Jun 2008 04:16:13 +0000

I too long for the days when big things were accomplished. It’s a shame that The MTA is in such shambles.

By: Cap'n Transit

Cap'n Transit — Thu, 05 Jun 2008 02:33:10 +0000

Thanks for the link, Ben.

Boris, the reason you never see anyone at the LIRR East Side Access project is that most of the work is happening underground, in Manhattan. Single stations may cost $1 billion, but that’s in Manhattan, where the tunnels are being dug deep underground with boring machines.

The extension I talk about in my post would use an existing right-of-way; all that would need to be done is to grade the surface, lay tracks and build stations. Much less than $1 billion per station. The “Northeast Queens Line” on that map would be elevated above the LIE, and the “Southeast Queens Line” would use the LIRR right-of-way, so either one would be much cheaper.

Other than the Second Avenue Subway, the only lines on that map that would require a whole new tunnel – and haven’t already been built – are the Nostrand Avenue and Utica Avenue extensions. In that less-populated area of Brooklyn, they could probably be built cut-and-cover for a lot less than $1 billion per station. The eastern branch of the L that’s proposed was to be elevated, but that could also be cut-and-cover.

By: Scott C

Scott C — Wed, 04 Jun 2008 17:52:26 +0000

Don’t underestimate the amount of corruption in the New York City building trades. There is plenty of graft to go around. There are several reasons why costs are so much higher. The cost of labor is one, the cost of materials – e.g. steel and concrete have exploded, regulatory costs are higher, and the cost of insurance for workers’ comp claims and litigation is much higher.

What is sad is that other countries are still building subways. While I appreciate low taxes as much as the next person, we shouldn’t forget that they are used for useful public works projects.

By: Marc Shepherd

Marc Shepherd — Wed, 04 Jun 2008 17:41:18 +0000

The trouble is that we’re living in an era of great skepticism about what government can accomplish. It wasn’t always so. If Robert Moses had had the same interest in railroads as he had in bridges and highways, he could have built the IND Second System two or three times over. These days, nobody gets government funding to build on that scale.

The higher expense of building stations today is attributable to many factors, among them the lengthy environmental requirements that Robert Moses never had to satisfy. I am not advocating a return to Moses era, just pointing out that the high cost of doing business here isn’t just attributable to “corruption.”

The Archer Avenue Line, by the way, is a mere pipsqueak compared to the original plan. It was meant to extend much farther into southeastern Queens. They had actually tunneled farther than the current Jamaica Center terminal, but they ran out of money.