My mom was the first to point out the great cover on this week’s New Yorker. Roz Chast, my favorite cartoonist, offered up her take on the Second Ave. Subway routing. I particularly enjoy the detour to Nebraska in between 34th and 42nd Streets. Sending the eventual T train out to Brighton Beach or even the Yukon Territories isn’t a half bad idea either.
It has become cliched to discuss the ways in which the Second Ave. Subway construction is impacting the Upper East Side. Residents have been complaining for years; businesses have struggled; and rent, as The Times has so kindly pointed out, is going down. In fact, as the MTA has moved further along in the process, the complaints have only grown louder.
And those complaints are numerous. Besides the issues surrounding the physical presence of construction, Upper East Siders have complained about the location of station entrances, the hours of blasting and the hours of truck service into and out of the site. They have bemoaned dust and have even tried to claim that their dogs are suffering animal post-traumatic stress from the constant blasting. I’m sure once the subway is open, they’ll complain about headways the lack of a full line.
Now, I don’t mean to belittle these complaints. The MTA has not been, for much of the project, a very good neighbor. The launch box site in the low 90s was a mess for years, and the authority has learned to mitigate the spread of dust and debris through an awkward trial-and-error process during construction. It hasn’t been particularly easy for residents, and some of their complaints have merit.
That said, their latest stink stinks. Because of their previous complaints, the MTA has had to adjust work hours, and now residents are complaining about the impact of their earlier complaints because work is now going on into the night. DNA Info broke the story:
MTA officials are considering nighttime visits to apartments around East 72nd Street, after repeated complaints by residents who say the overnight construction for the Second Avenue subway is keeping them awake. Engineers for the authority are planning the visits to hear — and feel — for themselves what’s going on late-night and try to find ways to mitigate the problems, MTA spokesman Kevin Ortiz said…
Ortiz said in an email that the MTA had tried shifting the drilling work to daytime hours, but said that was only “partially effective” since the construction must be completed in a specific order and there was no arrangement of work that would prevent the drilling from happening at night. The MTA is restricted to blasting between 3 and 7 p.m., and there’s no trucking allowed after 10 p.m. Therefore, the window for drilling to prep for the blasting has to occur in the middle of the night, Ortiz explained.
Unfortunately, the DNA Info story, while quite representative of the neighbor’s complaints, doesn’t tell the fully story. Why does the MTA have to do work overnight? Because residents asked the authority’s contractors not to conduct blasting after 7 p.m. and not to allow trucks in after 10 p.m. The MTA eventually obliged, but the flip side of this compromise in a 24-hour work site means late-night work. Now, the residents are complaining about the work the MTA must conduct in order to adhere to the blasting and trucking deadlines. It is seemingly a catch-22.
It’s hard not to be a bit skeptical here. If the Upper East Side residents had their ways, the MTA wouldn’t have a window to do the work it needs to do to build a subway. There wouldn’t be time to prep for blasting or remove the debris. There would be a 10-hour workday, and construction would take five extra years and billions more. No one wants that.
Building a subway is messy work, especially when the route goes through such a densely populated area. We don’t yet know what the future holds for the Second Ave. subway, but we know that Phase 1 will continue, noise and all. It’s the price we pay for progress.
A glimpse inside what will one day be a station cavern for the Second Avenue Subway. (Photo courtesy of MTA, Patrick Cashin)
Before leading us into the cavern of the 7 line extension last Friday, MTA Capital Construction President Michael Horodniceanu spoke at length about the megaprojects currently under his auspices. We know the story of the city-funded 7 line extension and the ever-ballooning costs and construction timeline for the East Side Access project. We know too that Phase 1 of the Second Ave. Subway is currently on pace for revenue service in December 2016 even if initial reports seven years ago predicted a 2012 finish. But what of the rest of the project?
During his talk on the MTACC, Horodniceanu mentioned in broad sweeps the future of the Second Ave. Subway. For many years, MTA officials refused to speak much about Phases 2-4 of the project. They were focused on securing funding for the remainder of Phase 1 and ensuring that this part of the long-awaited East Side subway line would truly see the light of day this time around. After three failed attempts at building the line, after all, and with billions of dollars in federal money on the line, the MTA couldn’t afford to let this opportunity pass.
Now, though, we’ll have a subway that connections from the BMT Broadway stop at 57th St., swings east to 63rd and Lexington and continues north to 96th St. and Second Ave. It is Phase 1 of a four-phase project, and maybe one day, when the 2015-2019 capital plan comes up, the MTA will look for more funding for future phases. Of course, as Horodniceanu explained, the irony is that with some extra money now, the MTA could have built SAS up to 115th St.
Since preexisting tunnels connect from 99th St. to 105th and from 110th to 119th, the MTA, said Horodniceanu “could now build stations at 105th St. and 115th St.” The cost would be a cool $750 million – $1 billion per station, but the only obstacle is the money. The environmental impact statements are completed, and the tunnels themselves are in place. In fact, some of the tunnel north of 99th St. will be used as tail tracks for Phase 1.
Of course, as we know, the MTA isn’t going to build those stations any time soon. In fact, we don’t even know if future phases of the so-called stubway line will see the light of day. On Friday, Horodniceanu estimated that the remaining three phases could cost a total of $23-$24 billion. Seven years ago, the four phases combined were expected to cost a total of $16 billion. By the time the authority puts their shovels or TBMs into the ground, I’m sure that estimated total will increase to even higher levels.
Essentially, the original decision to split the Second Ave. Subway project into four phases doomed it from the start. The origins of that decision these days have always been a bit murky. Some have said it came about due to pressure from Sheldon Silver and the realities of funding. The MTA didn’t think it could secure the full funding amount at the start and tried to break the project into more palatable pieces.
A Times story from 1999 tells a slightly different story: “Transit officials said they had limited the plan for new construction to upper Manhattan because of the engineering difficulties and expense of extending a new line under the more congested parts of midtown.” In this telling, it almost seems as those Phases 3 and 4 were simply for show. Phases 1 and 2 were easier and cheaper, but the charade of Phases 3 and 4 could keep hope alive. The truth is probably somewhere in between.
Today, we live with this decision. We’ll have Phase 1 at least, and Phase 2, while also expensive, should see the light of day. Beyond that, it’s anyone’s guess. Phase 3 through Midtown will be a challenge, and Phase 4 through Lower Manhattan will be too. The MTA though made this bed 13 years ago, and today, as the pace of construction slows and costs go up, we live with it.
The Second Ave. Subway construction isn’t even for the dogs, according to irate pet owners along the Upper East Side. Although a recent study conducted by MTA contractor Parsons Brinckerhoff found no concerns with the air quality along Second Avenue, residents have continued to claim that dust and debris from the blasting is creating unsafe conditions for people. Now, canine lovers say their dogs are suffering as well.
As DNA Info’s Serena Solomon reports, pup owners say their animals are suffering as well. Some dogs have been coughing with runny noses while others are exhibiting skin conditions and “psychological issues” relating to the ongoing subway blasting. “As soon as the sirens go off, the whole building starts barking,” dog owner Noura Insolera said. Her dog Winnie, she explains, “runs back and forth, scratches at the walls, tries to jump out the window.”
Even if the air quality isn’t impacting these pups’ lives, their owners say the animals have either become skittish or lethargic in the face of more blasting. Color me skeptical, but it seems as though dogs are just the next pawn in the great NIMBY fight against a new subway line.
Salon, on its Dream Cities blog, tackles a question near and dear to my heart: Why does it take so damn long to build a new subway system? As the MTA already has nearly 17 years worth of documents on its website for only the current attempt at a Second Ave. Subway, by the time construction on Phase 1 alone is wrapped, it will have been over 20 years from the release of the initial scoping document in 1995 to revenue service in 2016. At that rate, it’ll take 80 more years for the other parts of the subway extension to see the light of day.
So what, then, takes so long? According to Salon’s Will Doig, seven different elements, many of them interrelated, slow down transit expansion plans in the United States. Up front, he pinpoints the obvious. By combining funding from various sources — the feds, states, cities, the bureaucracy slow distribution of money, and oftentimes, there isn’t enough money guaranteed up front to see megaprojects through to completion. He also pays heed to the physical challenges of working around 100-year-old city infrastructure that was never properly mapped, and he fingers a societal addiction to cars that often serves to marginalize transit. He certainly isn’t wrong there.
In my opinion, though, his two key elements concern mismanagement and what he terms basic fairness. With a small group of companies qualified to build subways, mismanagement runs rampant. That is a problem that should be addressed if other SAS phases receive funding. The fairness element though is a tough one. He writes:
Good public transit is a cherished ideal of many progressives. Ironically, progressive values can end up making transit construction take longer. Part of the reason we don’t build as fast as China does is because we have workers’ unions, ADA compliance rules, and environmental concerns that require time-consuming impact studies. “If we didn’t have to put elevators everywhere and we imported non-union Mexican immigrants to do the work, you could build a lot more of everything,” says Duke, who hastens to add that he’s not in favor of that. Good, affordable transit is a human rights issue too, though, and in many ways the common link in our desire for healthier, less wasteful cities that serve everyone equally.
Many transit advocates may whisper that the fairness balance has tipped too far to the other side. The MTA issued its notice of intent to prepare an environmental impact statement for the Second Ave. Subway in March of 2001. The FEIS saw the light of day 38 months later in May of 2004, and the authority had to further revise its assessment in 2009 to find no material impact when it had to redesign station configurations at 72nd and 86th St. That is a time-consuming and costly process that should be streamlined as well.
Doig doesn’t dwell on another issue — NIMBYism — that can often stop subway expansion projects in their metaphoric tracks before they move much beyond an idea on paper. Lawsuits and community outrage can slow down worthwhile projects as well. Still, his list of seven can serve as a primer for readers of this site who want to know just why it’s taking so long for such a short subway extension underneath Second Ave. to become a reality.
As subway construction along Second Ave. marches forward, residents have been up in arms over just about everything. There’s constant construction, noise, dirt, debris, blasting, smoke, drilling. You name it, and it’s happening as the MTA works to buil a subway line through a densely populated area. Businesses are shuttering, and people want to move out. But for the hardy among us who can withstand the area, it might not be a bad time to move in.
Conventional and practical wisdom in the New York real estate market often focuses around accessibility. Brokers and the folks who post to Craigslist tout the nearest subway stop, and we wear our commutes as badges of honor or disgrace. I have friends who will live only so many blocks away from the nearest subway stops, and express stations command a premium.
Lately, the Upper East Side along Second Ave., once a desirable place to live, has seen a market downturn. Sean Creamer for Our Town profiled the state of the market last week. He writes:
Commercial tenants who rent 700 square feet would pay $5,200-5,600 under regular rent conditions, but now that the construction has curbed business, the same renters pay $3,200-3,700 and businesses are “still struggling,” [real estate manager Andre Soto] said.
Even residential properties have been discounted in the construction zones. On average, a one-bedroom apartment in one of Soto’s buildings on the Upper East Side would go for $1,100-$2,200, and a two-bedroom would go for anywhere between $1,800 and $2,800. Soto has lowered rents by 30 percent in the areas that are at the mercy of subway construction because of the volume of complaints filed by residents…
Although the problems with the subway construction have caused some people to move, they have opened the market on the Upper East Side to a younger generation willing to deal with the clamor in exchange for lowered rents. Because of the proximity to the hustle and bustle of Second Avenue and the cheaper rents, many more young professionals have come in, according to Norman Shakner, a realtor from A.C. Lawrence Realty. He noted that real estate in the area is booming because of the prospect of having a train line in the future and the fact that proprietors are driving down prices to fill empty apartments.
Renting near the Second Ave. subway construction might not be the best life decision right now. The trains are not enter projected to enter revenue service until at least the end of 2016, and another 59 months of subway construction can lead to many an explosion and numerous sleepless nights. But for those with the money and the patience, buying on the Upper East Side may be a sound investment.
Over the course of New York City history, real estate booms in newly accessible areas have generally followed the subway as it opened. The Upper West Side grew up out of the El trains and IRT in the late 1800s and early 1900s. Large swaths of Queens came to life as the Flushing Line opened. While the Upper East Side is already a well-developed neighborhood, it will become even more desirable once the subway opens, and travel times to midtown, Union Square and beyond are cut considerably.
For now, though, a promise of that increase in value and a lifeline for a neighborhood under siege is a long way off. Those who have lived through four years of work know what it’s like, but another five years is a rather long time indeed. “The new subway is going to take the Lexington Avenue crowd and bring them over to Second Avenue,” Mahoud Ahmed, who works at Ray’s Pizza, said. “Once the train is done, it will bring more business to the area.”
Despite constant blasting and an increase in dust particles, Second Ave. Subway construction has not led to an unsafe level of air pollutants on the Upper East Side, a study released today by the MTA claims. The report, prepared by Parsons Brinckerhoff, reviewed by the EPA and available right here, was conducted over a four-week period this fall. It found that pollutants were below nationally acceptable air quality standards and that spikes in pollutant levels coincided with increased automobile traffic and not blasting frequency.
“Based on the results of the study, there are no concerns that Second Avenue Subway construction is causing any danger to the public’s health,” MTA Capital Construction President Michael Horodniceanu said in a statement. “We will continue to do everything we can to be a good neighbor as we complete this critically important project as quickly as possible.”
I can’t speak to the validity of the findings, but it seems that residents are skeptical. Some have noted that Parsons Brinckerhoff is an MTA contractor while others are complaining about smoke from blasting in addition to dust particles and debris. With station work expected to begin at 86th St. this year, these complaints will not cease. Just 59 more months to go.
These proposed entrances for the Second Ave. Subway on 86th St. were the subject of a federal lawsuit.
NIMBYs, NIMBYs, wherefore art thou, NIMBYs?
While not quite the question posed by Juliet to Romeo, I often find myself asking why NIMBYs are constantly opposing any new public transit projects in New York City. A Transitway on 34th Street? That’ll cause a wall of buses. A train to LaGuardia that skirts around the edges of Astoria? That’ll disrupt a peaceful residential neighborhood. Subway entrances on 86th Street and Second Avenue? They’ll interfere with our precious driveway.
The final excuse was, as you may recall, one of the drivers behind a lawsuit filed earlier this year by a group of residents from 86th St. near Second Ave. These residents claimed that the MTA had “arbitrarily and capriciously” chosen to place new subway entrances on their blocks. The influx in pedestrians — who would be pointed away from the driveway — would harm Yorkshire Towers and its inhabitants, and the MTA, they claimed, did not properly assess the environmental impact of the entrances as they failed to consider new information as it emerged.
Luckily for the MTA and those eagerly awaiting better subway access, a judge earlier this month granted a motion to dismiss the complaint. Judge Thomas Griesa’s 16-page decision is available here as a PDF. Essentially, he granted the defendants’ motion to dismiss on a legal technicality. The Yorkshire Towers residents had 180 days from the government’s finding of no environmental impact on the MTA’s decision to locate the station entrances along 86th St., but they filed their lawsuit eight months late.
In reply to such an argument, the Yorkshire Towers plaintiffs attempted to claim that the MTA had an obligation to consider new information. As Judge Griesa dryly noted, however, the plaintiffs failed to present this new information in their complaint. Had the complaint not been time-barred, though, it seems as though Griesa would not have been too sympathetic to the claims set forward by Yorkshire Towers. But it matters little; they waited eight months beyond the statute of limitations, and the station entrances will go ahead as planned.
The staircases at Entrance 2 have been designed to minimize passenger flow in front Yorkshire Towers by siphoning riders away from the active driveway.
So the MTA can now move forward with work at 86th St. for these station entrances, and that happens not a moment too soon. A recent report to the MTA has found that the project is inching ever closer to its contingency timeline. Right now, the MTA has only 66 days’ leeway but five years of construction remaining until SAS Phase 1 hits revenue service. With the lawsuit out of the way, the MTA and its contractors can move forward at 86th St. without further delays.
Meanwhile, the NIMBYs lose. It’s a battle in a bigger fight for better transportation, and it’s part of living in a city. People will walk down your block, and the subway — a truly desirable thing — will open its doors down the street. Life will go on.
Art at the new 63rd Street station will evoke the former Second Avenue elevated trains.
I’ve been sitting on this one for a couple of weeks, but it’s still timely. A few weeks ago in The Wall Street Journal, Jennifer Maloney profiled my favorite under-the-radar MTA department. She highlighted the upcoming plans for art installations at the MTA’s new stations. Along the 7 line extension and underneath Second Ave., the authority will soon have four blank canvases, and they’re planning new art for each station.
She writes:
As subway riders descend the escalator into a new 7 line station near 10th Avenue and 34th Street in 2013, they will be followed by a mosaic of brightly colored celestial orbs shining from a deep blue sky. At a planned Second Avenue subway stop at 63rd Street, the walls will display photographs evoking the elevated trains that once rumbled above. And a station at 96th Street will feature line drawings fired onto ceramic tiles, playing with perspectives as travelers move through the space.
The designs are part of the Metropolitan Transportation Authority’s plan to make each of its new subway stations on the extended 7 line and new Second Avenue line a massive work of public art. Building on the MTA’s nearly three-decade history of enlivening subway and commuter rail stations with mosaics and sculpture, the agency has commissioned art that accompanies riders from the sidewalk to the platform and helps shape spaces that haven’t yet been built.
The effort is ongoing: The MTA last week issued a call for artists for the Second Avenue line’s 72nd Street station. “It’s very exciting,” said Sandra Bloodworth, director of the MTA’s Arts for Transit and Urban Design program, who, along with the artists, discussed details of the projects for the first time. “It’s three New Yorkers, three visions. I think that reflects the subway; it reflects our ridership.”
As Maloney notes, the MTA allocates a small portion of the construction costs to artwork. The new installations are expected to cost between $900,000 and a $1 million each and are a part of projects that will cost a few billion dollars each. It’s a great program that livens up the subways, turning them into the city’s most extensive art gallery. Check out Maloney’s piece for more renderings of the upcoming art. Jean Shin’s work at 63rd St., which, according to Maloney, will “depict the 1942 dismantling of the Second Avenue elevated line and the opening of the sky over an area accustomed to rumbling and shadows,” sounds particularly intriguing.
The Upper East Side’s two-week reprieve is over. The MTA had halted blasting underneath Second Ave. shortly before Thanksgiving in order to alleviate residents’ concerns over dust and debris, and yesterday, after implementing a series of remediation measures, the blasting resumed.
As DNA Info wrote yesterday, residents are cautiously optimistic that the fixes will solve the problem. The MTA says it has expanded the blasting window by an hour in order to allow for more time in between charges. That way, the dust can settle before any blast triggers more debris.
The authority and its contractors have also tried to improve the muck houses — the giant structures along the avenue at 72nd St. — to better minimize the spread of blasting dust. New “Dust Bosses” will spray water on the dust in order to contain it within the muck house, and a burlap curtain will help seal some overhangs and vents.
Initially, residents offered some guarded praise for the new measures. “It’s a dramatic difference,” one said to The Post. “I see a big improvement, and I hope . . . it continues.”
Postscript: I made an appearance on Fox 5’s “Good Day New York” yesterday to discuss the Second Ave. Subway blasting issues. Check out the corresponding story right here and watch the video below.