East Side Access - L.I.R.R. Link to Grand Central

[Kris]

February 1, 2004

Amtrak Is the Latest Roadblock in Plan to Link L.I.R.R. to Grand Central Terminal

By MATTHEW WALD

The East Side access project, a plan to bring Long Island Rail Road trains to Grand Central Terminal that has moved in fits and starts for 40 years, has hit a snag: Amtrak's financial straits.

Since the 1960's, the plan has been to run Long Island Rail Road trains from an existing complex of switches in Queens, shared with Amtrak, over about a mile of new track to an underused tunnel beneath the East River. That tunnel emerges in Manhattan at East 63rd Street, and from there, the trains would go through a new tunnel and join the tracks under Park Avenue that carry Metro-North trains to Grand Central. The new link would move perhaps 90,000 passengers a day on about 150 trains. It would relieve crowding at Pennsylvania Station and lure to the rails Long Island residents who work in east Midtown.

An agreement between Amtrak and the Long Island is needed because of the tangled history of the area's railroads. Amtrak's Northeast corridor was largely assembled by the old Pennsylvania Railroad. About a century ago, that railroad bought the Long Island Rail Road to get access to Manhattan. Now their ownership is separate again, with the Long Island owned by the Metropolitan Transportation Authority and the Northeast corridor going to Amtrak. Ownership of the tracks in Queens is shared.

Amtrak insists that the project is not for its customers, and should therefore not cost it any money. Amtrak lives on subsidies from Congress, and the railroad says it lacks the resources to bring its aging infrastructure into a state of good repair.

It also fears delays for its trains on its major route, the Boston-New York-Washington corridor.

The East Side access project also faces substantial engineering problems, mostly in digging from the East River to Park Avenue. The project would be the largest ever undertaken by the Metropolitan Transportation Authority. The plan was conceived in the 60's, when the 63rd Street tunnel was built. In the early 1990's, plans were drawn up to finish the job by 1998, with about a mile of additional tunnel on either side of the existing tunnel under the river, at a cost of about $3 billion. Now the completion date is 2012 and the price is $6.3 billion.

The immediate problem, though, is on the Long Island end, at the Sunnyside Yard in Queens, owned by Amtrak, and the adjacent Harold Interlocking, a two-mile complex used for sorting trains. On the western end are two tracks carrying trains to Penn Station and two more tracks carrying them back, as well as two more that peel off toward Long Island City and Brooklyn.

On the east are additional tracks. Two of them go to the Hell Gate Bridge and then into the Bronx, a route Amtrak takes to join the Metro-North tracks in New Rochelle on its way to New Haven and Boston. Two other tracks go to the Long Island Rail Road's Port Washington branch, and four go to Jamaica, Queens, and the other branches of the railroad.

During the commuter rush, trains roar through Harold Interlocking at the rate of 42 an hour. But the transportation authority would like to increase that to 66. The task is not much different from untangling the intersection of two busy, multilane streets, except that the trains are up to a quarter-mile long and some lumber through at 15 miles an hour, making maneuvering difficult.

The transportation authority is considering digging one or more tunnels so that trains coming out of Penn Station can turn left to head for Hell Gate and New England without having to cross over at grade level in front of oncoming westbound trains. That would give Amtrak an incentive to consent to allowing the work to be done on its property, authority officials say. Whatever the changes in layout, they will be for the long term, according to rail executives. "It's got to last 100 years,'' said James Dermody, president of the Long Island Rail Road, who pointed out that the current configuration of Harold was in place for the opening of the first Penn Station, in 1908.

A reconfigured Harold Interlocking could be a major boon for Amtrak, which often sees its trains lose valuable time as they pass through Harold on their way to Hell Gate and New Rochelle. Timeliness is crucial there because Metro-North, which owns the tracks from New Rochelle to New Haven, is so busy that it has assigned Amtrak "slots" at specific times, and Amtrak has been known to miss the window.

But there is also peril, in the form of extra costs. Amtrak says that the soil at Sunnyside and Harold is filled with toxic substances that have leaked or been dumped. Amtrak, near broke, is refusing to let work proceed until the transportation authority agrees to protect Amtrak against all liability and costs arising from stirring up poison dirt.

In addition, New Jersey Transit uses the yard to store trains. That, too, could be disrupted, Amtrak warned. It has sent the transportation authority a series of blunt letters, signed by David L. Gunn, now president of Amtrak, who was president of the New York Transit Authority, a component of the Metropolitan Transportation Authority, from 1984 until 1990.

The Metropolitan Transportation Authority insists that the dispute is not serious. Referring to contaminated soil, William M. Wheeler, the director of planning at the Long Island, said, "Amtrak hasn't shown us anything to indicate that.'' But Amtrak has avoided the word "share.'' "I must have an agreement that will not produce any additional financial burdens on Amtrak,'' Mr. Gunn wrote to Peter S. Kalikow, chairman of the transportation authority, on Dec. 4. In an earlier letter he complained that the authority was proceeding "without directly addressing Amtrak's concerns.''

Both sides say discussions are continuing, with no agreement so far.

Copyright 2004 The New York Times Company


http://mta.info/capconstr/esas

[Kris]

LIRR takes a step toward East Side

BY JOIE TYRRELL
STAFF WRITER

March 7, 2004

Workers have dug a 150-foot-deep hole in Long Island City that serves as one of the first steps of the East Side Access project, a multibillion-dollar transit plan linking the Long Island Rail Road to Grand Central Terminal.

LIRR President James Dermody said that workers have taken down buildings on one city block and dug a pit that will provide access for the railroad to the existing 63rd Street tunnel that will eventually carry Long Islanders to the east side of Manhattan.

However, Dermody cautioned that this is preliminary work on the East Side Access project that has yet to be fully funded.

"There is some progress being made in preliminary construction, not heavy construction," Dermody said. "These are the steps you have to take to proceed to full construction and we won't have full construction until we get full funding from the government.

"In the meantime you can't sit and do nothing, because the clock is ticking."

The East Side Access alignment connects to the LIRR's Port Washington Branch and Main Line tracks within the Harold Interlocking in Sunnyside, Queens. From Harold, the alignment proceeds through a set of five tunnels under Amtrak's Sunnyside Yard to a section that begins at the edge of the existing LIRR Yard.

In that section, the five tunnels merge into two tunnels, pass under Northern Boulevard, and meet the existing 63rd Street Tunnel structure immediately west of Northern Boulevard.

Dermody said the current construction project at Northern Boulevard and 41st Street allows crews to get a tunnel-digging machine below the surface and eventually crews will tunnel east toward Harold Interlocking.

Workers are also building a yard and a shop on Arch Street to handle the railcars to be used for East Side Access.

The project is expected to be complete in 2012.

But costs in recent months have continually increased with the price tag of the project now at $6.3 billion. President George W. Bush has allocated $75 million in this year's budget and $100 million in next year's proposed budget, the single largest project approved in transportation.

Rep. Peter King (R-Seaford) said he's optimistic the project will be fully funded. "There has been work going on for years at the work site and now there is new work," he said. "Certainly the MTA is going forward with its plans anticipating it is going to be done."

Also, the railroad is in negotiations with Amtrak as it needs to work out agreements with the rail provider. The LIRR needs easements to go under Sunnyside yard and must modify the track at Harold Interlocking.

"Those negotiations are moving," said Dermody, who is the lead negotiator in the talks.

Copyright © 2004, Newsday, Inc.

[ZippyTheChimp]

NY Newsday

Big plans on track

East Side access, more new cars, a third Main Line track; these and other moves are part of a proposed multibillion-dollar expansion

BY JOIE TYRRELL
STAFF WRITER

March 17, 2004

In a daily game of transit hopscotch, Long Island Rail Road commuter Robert Audette takes the railroad to Queens then jumps to the No. 7 subway, then catches the 4 or the 5 downtown.

To get to his lower Manhattan office, "it's over two hours and 15 minutes one way," said Audette, of Shirley. "It's definitely an inconvenience to change trains. Each one is a separate mini-commute and they have their own separate problems."

That all may change over the next decade, as the Long Island Rail Road readies for what could be the biggest expansion in its 170-year history. In store are multimillion-dollar capital projects, from new cars to storage yards to changes in routes that could, for the first time, connect Long Island commuters to the East Side and possibly lower Manhattan.

It's an incredible wish list reaching into the billions of dollars, with target completion dates reaching into the next decade. Yet competition for transit dollars will be fierce, and some close to the Metropolitan Transportation Authority, the parent agency of the LIRR, say that funding for all of them may be reaching for a "pie-in-the-sky."

MTA executives are confident the capital projects for the LIRR eventually will be funded, offering commuters more service and travel alternatives. The last major LIRR expansion took place in 1898 with construction of the track from Great Neck to Port Washington.

"One of the major reasons is to take a 19th-century system and bring it into the 21st century," said MTA executive director Katie Lapp. "I think we can get these projects off the ground and get the funding for them, which I am optimistic we will."

But transit watchers, worried about future fare hikes, say state and federal governments are kicking in fewer dollars than they have for past capital projects. And the MTA has already borrowed so much that debt service is expected to grow to $1.7 billion annually by 2007.

"The real worry is how are you going to fund them?" said Beverly Dolinsky, executive director of the LIRR Commuters Council, a riders' advocacy group. "You can't keep borrowing and have this huge debt service, because the fare will go so high that nobody will use the system."

The project most likely to move forward is East Side Access. In the works for three decades, it will mean a one-seat rail link from Long Island to Grand Central using an existing, but unused, tunnel at 63rd Street.

So far, preliminary construction has started in Long Island City. Railroad officials are awaiting full funding for the project. The price tag has ballooned over the years from $4.3 billion in 1998 to $6.3 billion now. Federal officials say that $800 million in state and federal money has already been committed. It is scheduled to be completed by 2012.

"Certainly, the MTA is optimistic and I'm optimistic," said Rep. Peter King (R-Seaford).

LIRR President James Dermody said he is awaiting a funding grant from the Federal Transit Administration. He's hopeful the agreement will be in place by this summer. "Then it becomes almost automatic" in President George W. Bush's budget, Dermody said.

John Scofield, spokesman for the House Appropriations Committee, said, "It is extremely unlikely that those funds would stop flowing."

Roadblocks along the way

There have been a few snags, including modifications to the Sunnyside Yard, which is owned by Amtrak. Dermody is negotiating with Amtrak to resolve the issues, including allowing access to the nearby Arch Street yard and shop.

The railroad needs East Side Access, Dermody said, because the railroad is at capacity at Penn Station and can't add any more trains.

"It's a better option," said commuter Margaret Domenech of East Islip, whose office is between Park and Madison avenues. "Plus you don't have to have extra expense of the subway."

But along with the added capacity comes the need on Long Island for rail improvements to handle more trains. The railroad is trying to site a 16-track storage yard on the Port Jefferson line east of Huntington that would allow the LIRR to add service on the branch.

Public hearings last year were attended by many residents who opposed construction of a yard in their neighborhoods. The railroad has narrowed selection to six sites in Huntington and Smithtown.

While a yard will allow the railroad to add service on the Port Jefferson line, a major overhaul of the Main Line is in the works as well. LIRR officials call it the Main Line Corridor Improvement project, and it would mean building a third track along the Main Line from Bellerose to Hicksville.

Dermody said it would allow an expanded service for commuters who travel against the rush hour and also could handle freight, taking some trucks off congested highways. It would also mean the elimination of five grade crossings in Mineola, New Hyde Park and Westbury and substantial station rehabilitation.

"If we can get through the [environmental study] and get a ... decision, the only other drawback is the question of funding," Dermody said.

Sources close to the MTA say it could be a tough sell. The double-track Main Line travels right through the heart of Long Island, and community opposition could be strong.

"For a significantly lower cost than East Side Access, it provides significant and so many different benefits for the LIRR," said Mitch Pally, vice president of government affairs at the Long Island Association, a large business group.

Link to lower Manhattan

Pally, however, had harsh words for a recent proposal announced by the MTA and the Lower Manhattan Development Corp. that could link the LIRR to lower Manhattan.

Considered a priority of Gov. George Pataki, the plan would allow passengers to board trains at Kennedy Airport or the Long Island Rail Road's Jamaica station and ride through Atlantic Terminal in Brooklyn.

The plan differs in how riders would be sped from Brooklyn to Manhattan. They include building and enhancing tunnels under the East River.

A final design plan should be picked next month. It could cost up to $6 billion, with project supporters saying funding could come from Sept. 11 redevelopment money.

Pally said it's an expensive project that would save only about 90 seconds in commuting times for about 3,000 Long Islanders. One source close to the MTA called the project a "pie-in-the-sky" proposal.

Other projects planned for the railroad in coming years include completion of the purchase of new M-7 electric cars, which, by 2007, will transform the aging fleet.

Railroad officials are also looking to build a yard east of Ronkonkoma that would mean extending electrification farther into Suffolk County.

"Long Island has changed," Pally said. "The railroad is trying to change.

"The railroad does better now than it ever did before," he added. "Now, we want to give it additional capacity to do what it has never done before."

Upgrading the LIRR

The Long Island Rail Road is embarking on one of the most ambitious capital improvement projects in its 170-year history, with six potential service upgrades that, if completed, could cost billions of dollars.

1. East Side access

What it will do: Connect Long Islanders to East Side of Manhattan.

What it will cost: $6.3 billion

Completion date: 2012

Challenges: LIRR must negotiate with Amtrak; funding must be secured. Forecast: Very likely. Federal and state sources say funding will be secured.

2. Lower Manhattan rail link

What it will do: Establish oneseat ride to lower Manhattan from LIRR Jamaica station.

What it will cost: As much as $6 billion

Completion date: Construction timetable and completion date expected in spring.

Challenges: Funding; also, strong opposition from LI business and some transit advocacy groups.

Forecast: Questionable, and some transit watchers say highly unlikely.

3. Main line corridor improvement

What it will do: Add third main line track to critical 10 1/2-mile corridor between

Bellerose, Queens and Hicksville. Eliminate five grade crossings; likely improve some stations and bridges.

What it will cost: Unknown, likely in the multimillions.

Completion date: By 2015

Challenges: Could face community opposition.

Forecast: Hard to tell; project in early planning stages.

4. Port Jefferson line yard

What it will do: Add service on Port Jefferson line; extend electrification east of

Huntington for five of the six sites under consideration.

What it will cost: $75 million (estimated), not including cost of electrification of yard ($10 million per mile).

Completion date: 2011

Challenges: Neighborhood opposition.

Forecast: Somewhat likely.

Long Island business leaders say the yard is a must.

5. Yard east of Ronkonkoma

What it will do: Offer new options for residents east of Ronkonkoma, including direct service to both Penn Station and Grand Central Terminal; also, additional service branchwide and parking relief.

What it will cost: LIRR assumes $50 million, not including cost of electrification of the yard site ($10 million per mile).

Completion date: 2012, tied to opening of East Side access.

Challenges: Still in the very early stages.

Forecast: Promising. Transitwatchers say LIRR has made this a top priority; East

Enders have asked for more service.

6. M-7 Purchase

What it will do: Take fleet from oldest to newest cars. By 2010, about 85 percent of electric fleet will be new M7 cars; fleet size will be 20 percent larger than in 2002.

What it will cost: For 678 cars, $1.3 billion

Completion date: For currently funded car purchase, 2007.

Challenges: Some critics have said cars are too cramped, but commuters give them high marks.

Forecast: A done deal.

Copyright © 2004, Newsday, Inc.

[STT757]

Im a big proponet of connecting Lower Manhattan to the outer Suburbs and the Airports, however the cost to benefit ratio with regards to connecting Lower Manhattan to Long Island is probably not worth $6 Billion Dollars.

First of all Long Island is a mature suburb, connecting the LIRR is not going to draw new people to Long Island. The rail link would benefit people who are already commuting from Long Island to Lower Manhattan, as the article noted it's not that many people.

54% of Lower Manhattan's workforce from outside NYC proper comes from New Jersey, a number that is likely to grow because of the housing boom in New Jersey to which is still growing and still has not reached maturity.

New Jersey does not have a direct link to the Suburbs from Lower Manhattan, they have the PATH from Jersey City, Hoboken and Newark.

If 54% of Lower Manhattan's suburban commuters make do with the NJ Transit-PATH connection why can't LIRR commuters to Lower Manhattan (which are much less than the number who commute from New Jersey) make do with a LIRR-NYC Subway connection.

The more I think about it the more the "Super Subway" plan that has already been put forth to connect Lower Manhattan to JFK makes much more sense than building a brand new East river tunnel and building new Stations, lay up yards in Lower Manhattan for the LIRR.

You can develop the "Super Subway" plan to connect with JFK for probably $1 Billion Dollars (or less), which is a huge difference compared to $6 Billion Dollars + that a new East River tunnel would cost.

The money that would have been spent for the new East River tunnel would be better spent towards the ESA and or the SAS, both projects have estimated ridership numbers that dwarfs the best estimates for potential ridership should the LIRR be connected to Lower Manhattan.

The Port Authority is set to extend PATH service on the World Trade Center line from Downtown Newark to Newark Airport for approximetly $500 Million, you can build the "Super Subway" to connect Lower Manhattan to JFK for $1 Billion or less.

Which means you can connect Lower Manhattan to both Newark Airport and JFK Airport for approximetly $1.5 - $2 Billion Dollars, which provides more bang for the buck than the LIRR to Lower Manhattan $6 Billion Dollar + plan.

[Kris]

May 9, 2004

Seeing One Tunnel Too Many

By VIVIAN S. TOY

MARK HUDAK is an insurance defense lawyer from Uniondale who travels to Lower Manhattan at least three times a week for court appearances.

Like many commuters, he has tested different railroad and subway combinations to try to shave as many minutes as possible from his travel time. His current favored option takes about 70 minutes and involves changing trains at Jamaica and switching to a subway at the Long Island Rail Road's Atlantic/Flatbush terminal in Brooklyn.

Even though the last leg of his morning journey is the shortest, he said, "waiting for the subway is when I consider my work day beginning, because it's the toughest part of the trip. The rest is more relaxed and predictable."

So, like other commuters destined for Lower Manhattan who were interviewed last week at the Mineola train station, Mr. Hudak said he welcomed a plan proposed by Governor Pataki on Wednesday that would finally create a one-seat ride from Lower Manhattan to Kennedy Airport and the Jamaica terminal of the Long Island Rail Road.

"Anything that takes us anywhere near downtown without having to switch to a subway would make perfect sense," Mr. Hudak said. He added, though, that he would reserve final judgment until he determined how much time and money he would save from the proposed train link.

Mr. Pataki proposed a $6 billion plan to build a new tunnel under the East River that would link Lower Manhattan to Kennedy Airport and Long Island. He said the new rail link could cut 15 minutes from a Long Islander's commute to downtown Manhattan and could handle up to 100,000 passengers a day.

"Long Islanders as well as Queens and Brooklyn commuters will experience a more direct and more comfortable trip to Lower Manhattan," Mr. Pataki said. He said the new link would reduce congestion on subways that carry Long Island riders from Penn Station or the Atlantic Terminal and would also strengthen the competitiveness of the airport by giving air travelers a 36-minute connection from Kennedy to Manhattan.

The plan would allow riders to get to Lower Manhattan from the airport and the Jamaica railroad terminal in Queens in a newly designed hybrid vehicle that would travel on the tracks of the AirTrain and altered tracks of the Long Island Rail Road. The new train would travel from the airport, through Jamaica and Atlantic Terminal in Brooklyn and then through the new tunnel into Manhattan.

The proposal is also supported by Mayor Michael Bloomberg, but perhaps the loudest and most persistent lobbyists for the new connection have been downtown business leaders, who feel that Lower Manhattan has for too long been at a competitive disadvantage to Midtown because it lacks one-seat access to the suburbs.

But there has been no corresponding clamor for the rail link from Long Islanders. Indeed, business leaders, transit advocates and planning experts have questioned the need for the project, particularly when limited transportation dollars are needed for other projects they deem more pressing, particularly the East Side Access plan to connect the Long Island Rail Road to Grand Central Terminal.

Transit advocates said last week that they were skeptical of the estimate that the downtown link would cut a commute by 15 minutes, and noted that only those Long Islanders who are headed to the World Trade Center area, where the train would stop, would actually achieve those savings. Others who work farther downtown or uptown would still have to walk or take a subway to get to their jobs, reducing any time savings.

"The downtown link is not the highest priority for Long Island, from our perspective," said Mitchell H. Pally, the vice president for government affairs at the Long Island Association, the Island's largest business group. "We're not opposed to it, but there are more important projects that we want to make sure are implemented and finished."

Beverly Dolinsky, executive director of the Long Island Rail Road Commuter's Council, agreed. "We don't support downtown access because it's very, very expensive and the case has not been made that enough people would use it and we're dealing with scarce dollars," she said. The Regional Plan Association, a nonprofit agency that focuses on 31 counties in New York, New Jersey and Connecticut, estimated that only 5,000 to 8,000 riders might use the new link during peak hours, based on current ridership figures. The association did its analysis prior to the governor's announcement, which relied on recommendations made in a joint study done by the Lower Manhattan Development Corporation, the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey, the Metropolitan Transportation Authority and the city Economic Development Corporation.

"In terms of cost benefit and the number of riders it would benefit, it just doesn't make sense," Ms. Dolinsky said. "You're going to spend $6 billion for 5,000 riders at rush hour?" Estimates for the proposed $17 billion Second Avenue subway anticipate 220,000 riders on its first day.

Mr. Pataki said last week that the Port Authority had already committed $560 million for the downtown rail link and that the Metropolitan Transportation Authority and the Lower Manhattan Development Corporation would also kick in some funding. There also is an estimated $2.8 billion left from the $21 billion federal relief package designated for Lower Manhattan after Sept. 11 that could be tapped.

But opponents of the downtown link fear that the governor ultimately will also have to seek federal transportation dollars, and the downtown link will then come in direct competition with other Long Island transportation projects, particularly given the governor's timetable for the new tunnel. Mr. Pataki said he expected to begin the formal environmental review process for the downtown rail link this summer. He said he hoped to see construction begin in 2006 and have service begin in 2013.

Senator Charles E. Schumer said he supports the idea of a rail link to downtown, but only if the federal relief package for Lower Manhattan can cover the bulk of its cost. "I think this is a good idea for downtown and for Long Island, but we should not use transit bill money to build it," he said. "That money should go to East Side Access and other transportation projects."

Mr. Pally said that other Long Island railroad projects that should have higher priority include the East Side Access project, which is scheduled for completion in 2012, and a third track on the railroad's Main Line, which would allow a significant expansion of service between Bellerose and Hicksville and is supposed to be completed in 2016. Even longer-range projects like transportation alternatives in the Nassau Hub, the expansion of Route 347 on the North Shore of Suffolk County and the building of a new freight tunnel under New York Harbor, which would reduce truck traffic on Long Island, should take precedence, he added.

"All these projects would impact more people and provide additional options for Long Islanders," Mr. Pally said. "With the limited amount of state and federal funding that's out there, these other projects should definitely take priority."

Gene Russianoff, staff attorney of the New York Public Interest Research Group Straphangers Campaign, said the M.T.A. and the federal government would be hard-pressed to come up with additional funding to help pay the $6 billion price tag for the downtown rail link. "How do you do that while still progressing the Second Avenue subway and East Side Access, which in our view are the region's top priorities?" he asked. "The M.T.A. already has big capital needs to fix and maintain the existing system and is already challenged to find resources for new projects."

Jon Orcutt, an associate director of the Tri-State Transportation Campaign, a nonprofit transit advocacy group, said he was pleased that the governor last week expressed a clear preference for a new tunnel over proposals to use existing subway tunnels. "That takes away the political problem of having to battle subway riders and disrupting their service," he said. "But then it just becomes another one of these big-ticket projects in search of funding."

He and other transit advocates warned that while planning for East Side Access is complete, the $6.3 billion needed to finish the project has not yet been secured. "The Long Island Rail Road's entire network strategy for the 21st century revolves around it," Mr. Orcutt said. "And it's already unclear how they're going to pay for it."

Planning for the East Side Access project began about 30 years ago. A two-level tunnel connecting Manhattan to Queens at 63rd Street was completed in 1989, but it only extends to Second Avenue in Manhattan and does not connect to existing rail lines in Queens. The subway system has been using the upper level of the tunnel for the last decade, but the lower level was intended for the Long Island Rail Road and has never been used.

John McCarthy, a spokesman for the M.T.A., said work to finally connect the empty tunnel to the railroad began last winter, including the building of a rail yard in Long Island City and the opening of a hole in Sunnyside to eventually complete the tunnel connection. The project involves building 3.5 more miles of tunnel and a new station that would go beneath the existing Grand Central concourse. The M.T.A. so far has committed $1.5 billion to the project and M.T.A. officials hope to have the federal government foot half of the total $6.3 billion cost.

The Regional Plan Association has long been an advocate for East Side Access, because some 60,000 Long Island commuters would save up to 22 minutes in travel time each way once Long Island Rail Road trains can stop at Grand Central. "It would strengthen the economy of Long Island by making it a much more attractive place to live for commuters who work in the city," said Jeffrey Zupan, a transportation expert with the association.

But the group has been more circumspect about the downtown rail link because it would end at the World Trade Center transportation center, and does not offer other stops in Lower Manhattan. The group has also recommended that any new tunnel be connected to the proposed Second Avenue subway, which then could be extended into Brooklyn. "The tunnel then would have a huge value for people in Brooklyn who now have very limited options for getting into the East Side of Manhattan," Mr. Zupan said. "The only way for a new tunnel to make sense is to connect it to the rest of the system."

Last week, Mr. Pataki stressed that while the proposed downtown link would end at the World Trade Center Transportation Center, it eventually could be extended to the Second Avenue subway or other existing subway lines. He and other proponents for the new tunnel said they did not believe it would compete for federal dollars with East Side Access or other projects.

"East Side Access is moving ahead as it should," said Carl Weisbrod, president of the Alliance for Downtown New York. "And the downtown rail link is a project that complements and supports East Side Access because it will strengthen the Long Island labor market and the Long Island economy's connection to the New York City region."

Mr. Weisbrod played down estimates for ridership on the new link that are based on current commuter statistics. "This is a different kind of transportation project and you have to view this more as an economic development project," he said.

The estimated 5,000 Long Island commuters who now come into Lower Manhattan during each peak travel hour "are hardy souls who make a very, very difficult commute to Lower Manhattan," Mr. Weisbrod said. New Jersey residents, on the other hand, have a much easier trip and as a result make up 25 percent of the downtown workforce, he added.

"Long Island ridership will increase dramatically once the opportunity for a much easier commute is available," he said. "That's why we have to view this project not just from the viewpoint of how it serves existing riders, but as a way of creating opportunity for the region as a whole."

Copyright 2004 The New York Times Company

[TonyO]

From NY1

City Taking Bids To Link LIRR To Grand Central Terminal

MAY 18TH, 2004

The city is now accepting bids to build a mile-long tunnel to bring Long Island Rail Road trains to Grand Central Terminal.

The contract will be awarded in August. Excavation is expected to start next year and wrap up in 2011 or 2012.

The price tag has been estimated at more than $6 billion, including the cost of buying property and new trains.

Trains will cross the East River from Queens into Manhattan through an unused level of the 63rd Street subway tunnel, then head down the existing tracks beneath Park Avenue to Grand Central.

President George Bush has endorsed the project, but he hasn't said how much federal money will be available to fund it.

[Kris]

November 20, 2004

Plan to Connect L.I.R.R. to Grand Central Hits Snag

By IAN URBINA

The plan to bring Long Island Rail Road trains to Grand Central Terminal has hit a snag, with a group of well-heeled businesses and developers opposing construction of a large building in Midtown that would house essential equipment and operations.

Citing concerns about pollution, traffic and security, neighbors of the proposed building, on 50th Street between Madison and Park Avenues, have accused the Metropolitan Transportation Authority of ducking the rules to get the project approved. They say that after having submitted the proposal for environmental review, the agency changed the project's location, breaking its promise to disperse the equipment around the neighborhood and opting to centralize it in a 16-story building. It would house diesel fuel tanks, backup generators and the main ventilation system for the project's tunnel.

"You can not put a building of this size, housing this type of equipment, in the center of New York City without proper review," said Roger M. Roisman, a lawyer representing the William Kaufman Organization and the St. Paul Travelers Companies, which own property next to the proposed building and are suing the authority to get it to conduct an environmental impact study on it.

"Whether or not it was their intention, the M.T.A. has avoided a public review and required environmental review of this facility."

Roco Krsulic, director of real estate for the authority, said that the building would be smaller than opponents have claimed, probably seven or eight stories. He said that centralizing the equipment was the best option because it would eliminate the need to tear up East 50th Street to put the equipment underground in various locations.

"The building will be entirely safe for the surrounding area," Mr. Krsulic said, adding that if there had been safety or environmental hazards connected to the equipment, the authority would not be building the same sort of warehouse next to its own headquarters in Manhattan.

But some neighbors, including Saks Fifth Avenue and the Palace Hotel, are unconvinced, and have formed a group called the Citizens for a Safe East 50th Street to press their concerns.

The group says there are three problems with the M.T.A.'s current plan, most significantly that the building would be "a magnet for terrorist attack" because of the explosive potential of large diesel tanks in such a densely populated area.

Further, it says that the ventilation system would spew stale air and potentially hazardous fumes from the tunnel into an area where the air intake systems for two adjacent buildings are located. And it says the building would worsen traffic problems along an already congested 50th Street, because it would have several loading docks for delivery and trash trucks.

On Oct. 7, Congresswoman Carolyn B. Maloney, a Manhattan Democrat, wrote Tom Ridge, the federal homeland security secretary, on behalf of the group, expressing her concerns about security and the explosive potential of the fuel tanks that would be in the building. Members of the group say that representatives from the Roman Catholic Archdiocese of New York have been attending their monthly meetings and expressing their opposition to the building, which would be around the corner from St. Patrick's Cathedral. The archdiocese also owns the land under the Palace Hotel, opposite the proposed building.

Bob Liff, a spokesman for the group, said, "The irony here is that all these parties actually support the East Side access project." He said the project would be great for business in the area, but added, "We just feel that this one part of the plan has problems."

Opposition to the 50th Street building is unlikely to block the project, which is scheduled for completion in 2012, but it does represent yet another headache for the authority. In the late 1970's, similar resistance to a ventilation tower on York Avenue near 63rd Street delayed construction on a subway tunnel beneath the East River for two and a half years.

Under the current plan, the authority would acquire and demolish four low-rise buildings at 44, 46, 48 and 50 East 50th Street to make way for the new building. Tom Kelly, a spokesman for the M.T.A., said that the authority was considering several alternatives suggested by the neighborhood group. "This area will benefit greatly from the project,'' he said, "but at the same time we are going do everything we can to accommodate the neighborhood's concerns.''

Copyright 2004 The New York Times Company

[TonyO]

NYObserver

Kaboom! MTA Plans Could Blow Up Midtown, Say Neighbors

by Ben Smith

Midtown property owners and their congresswoman are claiming that a planned Metropolitan Transportation Authority installation could turn into an explosive terrorist target with the potential to damage landmarks such as the Waldorf-Astoria Hotel and St. Patrick’s Cathedral.

At the center of the controversy is a planned 16-story building on East 50th Street between Park Avenue and Madison Avenue, right across the street from the Palace Hotel. The building would serve as a ventilation and cooling tower for a link between the Long Island Rail Road and Grand Central Terminal. Local property owners have been fighting the facility in court, arguing that it would bring traffic and pollution.

But the MTA’s plans to store diesel fuel for an emergency generator in or beneath the building is stirring the most concern, prompting Congresswoman Carolyn Maloney to write a letter to Homeland Security Secretary Tom Ridge, stating that the facility would create a “homeland security threat to thousands of workers and pedestrians.”

“Concerned neighbors point out that terrorists could target the building knowing that the resulting conflagration would likely destroy the surrounding buildings and spread to the underground passenger concourse below,” Ms. Maloney wrote in the October 7 letter.

The spokesman for the Metropolitan Transportation Authority, Tom Kelly, said he hadn’t seen the letter, and did not comment in detail on the project.

“We will take all safety and security precautions in the design and construction of the building,” he said.

Neighbors aren’t convinced. Representatives of the Palace Hotel, the Kaufman Organization, the restaurant group Smith & Wollensky, and St. Paul Travelers Companies, all with interests nearby, wrote their own letter to Secretary Ridge comparing the diesel fuel storage to the fuel tanks the explosion of which helped bring down 7 World Trade Center on September 11, 2001.

The spokesman for the Catholic Archdiocese of New York, Joseph Zwilling, also said, “We have been following the matter with concern.”

Managers of the Waldorf-Astoria were not immediately available for comment.

The new building would stand on the south side of 50th Street, just west of the Colgate-Palmolive building. The Waldorf-Astoria is half a block east, and the grounds of St. Patrick’s begin half a block west. The building would replace four smaller structures, including the one housing the venerable Italian restaurant Giambelli 50th.

The new building would be part of a $5 billion plan conceived 30 years ago and on schedule for completion in 2012. The East Side Access project would link Long Island commuters directly to Grand Central, giving them access to East Side subway lines and the commuter rail that the current Penn Station connection makes inconvenient. In the plan’s current form, LIRR riders would disembark deep below Park Avenue and be transported by escalators to a new concourse closer to Grand Central.

The legal battle over the site has focused on the MTA’s decision not to perform a full environmental review when it decided to change its original plans – according to a 2002 MTA assessment of project changes – because a facility on 50th street would “consolidate many ancillary facilities in one location and reduce construction and maintenance costs.” That would include the emergency generator, and its fuel, which would power the escalators in case of a blackout.

Lawyers for the neighbors filed a request for a preliminary injunction this spring, demanding that the MTA complete a full environmental review. They withdrew their request when the MTA agreed to that review, which a lawyer for the owners of 437 Madison Avenue, Roger Roisman, said is expected any day.

But the battle appears to be just heating up. Project opponents have already retained lawyers, consultants, and public relations teams, and have even produced a thick study touting an alternative proposal.

[alex ballard]

It would be a neat idea to have the LIRR get an equal-size terminal under GCT. Then both MNRR and LIRR would get all the space they need. They should also route MNRR over the Hells Gate Bridge to Penn Station where they too can have a terminal. Anyone here think NJT/Amtrak should go to GCT?

[Deimos]

NJT would be too much of a pain to re-route to GCT although it's a good idea. I don't think there is a need for two seperate amtrak stations in the city since the purpose of amtrak is to move people between the cities.

[Kris]

January 13, 2005

M.T.A. Finds Midtown Vent Project Sound; Critics Vow Fight

By SEWELL CHAN

The Metropolitan Transportation Authority, which wants to build a 16-story ventilation tower as part of a plan to connect the Long Island Rail Road to Grand Central Terminal, has concluded that the project is environmentally sound. Opponents of the tower proposal immediately rejected that finding yesterday.

The structure, to be built on East 50th Street between Madison and Park Avenues, would cost $62 million and house ventilation equipment, cooling towers, emergency generators, a fuel tank, a loading dock and a freight elevator - all sandwiched within a dense commercial block whose occupants have filed a lawsuit to stop the project.

Finding a way to adequately ventilate a new Long Island Rail Road terminal to be built deep below street level and serve an estimated 160,000 people a day has been an engineering priority for the authority. The proposed building would provide fresh air for the terminal and be a staging area for construction crews working on the project.

Under the plan, five existing buildings - at 44, 46, 48 and 50 East 50th Street and at 45 East 49th Street - would be acquired and demolished. The project would take about six years to complete.

In response to the lawsuit, filed in May 2003, the authority agreed to study the impact of the proposed project. The study, finished this week, concluded there would be no major negative effects on land use, traffic, air quality, noise, public safety and the environment.

The authority's arguments have not persuaded Representative Carolyn B. Maloney and Assemblyman Jonathan L. Bing, two Democrats who represent the area and issued statements yesterday calling the study a bid to rationalize a flawed plan.

"This building, if built as proposed, would cause a tremendous amount of environmental problems, in terms of the fuel that will be kept in the building, the exhaust and the potential danger to the neighborhood if this building were ever subject to a natural disaster or a terrorist attack," Mr. Bing said in an interview.

A lawyer for the owners of 437 Madison Avenue, an office building that would be next to the tower, called the study a sham. "It's ludicrous to call this a serious study or assessment," said the lawyer, John A. Herfort. "It doesn't lay out the underlying facts that are necessary to justify any of these conclusions, which appear to have been preordained."

A spokesman for the authority, Tom Kelly, said the report was thorough, fair and methodically conducted. "We never dismiss the sentiments of the community or of elected officials," Mr. Kelly said. "The environmental study can be commented on, and we're having a public hearing on Feb. 10. We solicit and seek input from everyone in the community."

Mr. Herfort and other lawyers for property owners in the area said they expected to continue their legal challenge. "Litigation is part of the process for any expansion," Mr. Kelly said. "Everybody litigates."

Copyright 2005 The New York Times Company

[Kris]

February 9, 2005

U.S. Backs Second Ave. Subway and Midtown Rail Plan

By SEWELL CHAN

http://graphics8.nytimes.com/images/dropcap/f.gifederal officials gave two long-planned transit projects - the Second Avenue subway and a Long Island Rail Road extension to Grand Central Terminal - an important endorsement yesterday, adding to pressure on Albany to come up with nearly $10 billion in state matching funds.

Out of 27 projects throughout the country assessed in an annual evaluation by the Federal Transit Administration, the two New York City projects were the only ones to be "highly recommended." Congress uses the recommendations to decide where to spend transit money. That endorsement may do little, however, to alter the situation in Albany, where Gov. George E. Pataki proposed a budget last month that would give the Metropolitan Transportation Authority $19.2 billion for its next five-year capital program, far less than the $27.7 billion requested.

The budget would include $2 billion over five years for expansion projects like the subway line and the rail extension, about a quarter of what the authority says it needs to open the first segment of the subway by 2011 and the Midtown rail extension by 2012.

While the issue of state aid is unresolved, the endorsement yesterday was a step toward the authority's goal of obtaining a multiyear agreement that would lock in federal aid for the projects.

The administrator of the Federal Transit Administration, an arm of the Department of Transportation, said she envisioned ultimately spending $2.6 billion, or 34 percent, of the $7.7 billion cost of the 3.5-mile rail extension, and $1.3 billion, or 30 percent, of the $4.3 billion needed for the initial 2.3-mile segment of the Second Avenue subway. She suggested that support from New York State would be critical to keep the projects moving.

"We are awaiting, primarily, the state-local funding commitment, and it is our understanding that deliberations continue now with the Legislature and with the M.T.A. about that commitment," the administrator, Jennifer L. Dorn, said in a conference call with reporters. "We believe strongly that if the federal government is going to make a contractual commitment, subject to appropriations, for the completion of the entire project, that the state-locality should do the same."

Ms. Dorn said of the two projects, "one is substantially ahead, in terms of time frame, than the other."

The Long Island Rail Road extension has so far received $254.5 million in federal money. The transit administration recommended that another $390 million be provided in fiscal 2006, and it expects to issue a financing agreement for the project in the next few months, which would essentially guarantee federal support for the duration of construction, assuming that the state provides its share.

The Second Avenue subway has received $8.9 million in federal aid, according to the transit administration, which said it expected to approve the project's final design early this year.

According to Federal Transit Administration documents, the subway line would serve 202,000 riders and the rail extension would serve 167,300 riders each weekday by 2025. "Each of these projects has significant federal support and incredible transportation benefits to a significant population," Ms. Dorn said.

Also yesterday, the Empire State Transportation Alliance, a coalition of civic, environmental and transportation groups, announced a $500,000 advertising campaign to promote financing of five-year capital programs for mass transit and state highways.

Janette Sadik-Khan, who was a transportation adviser to Mayor David N. Dinkins and a deputy administrator of the Federal Transit Administration under President Bill Clinton, said fast-growing areas in the West and South were likely to lobby Congress for the same federal transit dollars that New York needs.

"It's crucial that the state come up with the local match for these projects or we will find the money diverted to other parts of the country: Denver, Dallas, Portland, Phoenix," she said.

But Lynn Rasic, a spokeswoman for Mr. Pataki, said the risk of losing federal money had been overstated. "There is absolutely no indication that any actions to date would jeopardize future funds," she said.

Copyright 2005 (http://www.nytimes.com/ref/membercenter/help/copyright.html) The New York Times Company (http://www.nytco.com/)

[NewYorkYankee]

Lets all keep our fingers crossed! These two projects NEED THE GREEN LIGHT!

[Kris]

East Side Access Draws Opponents

BY MAURA YATES - Special to the Sun

February 10, 2005

East Side Access, a plan by the MTA to link the Long Island Rail Road and Grand Central Terminal through caverns deep underground, was "highly recommended" for federal subsidies by the Bush administration this week. Opponents of part or all of the plan have argued, however, that it is dangerous and profligate.

As described by the Metropolitan Transportation Authority, the $6.3 billion project will be a boon for 160,000 commuters a day, as well as the East Side businesses for which they are employees or customers.

Chief among the complaints of the project's opponents is a ventilation facility, planned for East 50th Street. They say it will be a ticking time bomb, with fuel tanks in the basement and a tower spewing tainted exhaust in a bustling neighborhood.

The only public hearing by the MTA and the Federal Transit Administration is scheduled for today. Concerned residents of the East Side had an opportunity to pose their questions to an MTA representative last week during a meeting of Community Board 5's transportation committee. The board, which cautiously supports the East Side Access plan, has recommended that the MTA closely consider public concerns and an alternative plan, which opponents said not only would be safer but would save as much as $2 billion.

East Side Access calls for building a four-platform terminal 15 stories below Grand Central to accommodate eight tracks for the Long Island Railroad. The project will shave an estimated 30 to 40 minutes off the commuting time of Long Islanders who work on the East Side and must now transfer at Penn Station before making their way back east across town.

To provide a supply of fresh air to the two immense caverns deep beneath the terminal - the MTA says it would be the largest mined underground terminal ever built in America - plans call for building the ventilation tower on the south side of 50th, between Park and Madison avenues. That is an area ringed with buildings of historic interest, including St. Patrick's Cathedral, Saks Fifth Avenue, and the Waldorf-Astoria hotel.

The facility would house ventilation intakes, exhausts, and fans and related equipment; a loading dock to allow trucks to enter for waste removal, and a freight elevator. Five low-rise buildings would be demolished to make way for the facility, which from the outside would resemble an office building with a glass-and-metal facade.

According to the MTA's recently released environmental assessment, the proposed facility would not have any significant adverse impacts - a conclusion some East Side residents dispute.

Assemblyman Jonathan Bing said he supports the East Side Access concept but objects to some aspects of the plan, which he said are dangerous to commuters and East Side residents.

One issue that has neighbors worried is plans for the basement storage of two fuel tanks, each holding between 6,000 and 8,000 gallons, to power emergency generators. The fuel tanks evoke memories of the explosion that brought down 7 World Trade Center on September 11, Mr. Bing said.

"Whether it's the target of a terrorist attack or natural disaster," the legislator said, "it could burn a large portion of Midtown Manhattan."

The MTA's representative at last week's meeting, Audrey Heffernan, pointed out that many buildings throughout the city, including several in the area of the proposed facility, have fuel tanks in their basements, and she said the MTA has much more stringent safety measures than those in force at some of those buildings. In addition, she said, the facility's fuel tanks will be stored deep in bedrock.

Aside from the specter of the entire East Side's being consumed by an inferno, Mr. Bing expressed concern about a less apocalyptic scenario: health problems developing from exposure to the vent's exhaust. Some East Side residents fear that the mist spewing from the ventilation tower will become contaminated with Legionnaire's-type bacteria or, in the case of a terrorist attack, even more lethal material.

According to the MTA, however, water will be circulated and treated before it is emitted, to prevent such contamination. Further, representatives of the transportation authority said that the exhaust would consist only of ambient air vented from the terminal, which would be free of pollutants, and that the elevated air-intake system, within a building that it will own and operate, would increase protection of the station's air supply against terrorism.

Among the plan's opponents is Cardinal Edward Egan, who is wary of the tower's proximity to the city's most famous religious institution.

"We are concerned about it because it is very close to St. Patrick's Cathedral," the communications director for the Catholic Archdiocese of New York, Joseph Zwilling, told The New York Sun. "We have been in ongoing touch with the governor's office to express concerns about it, and we will continue to do that."

In light of environmental and safety concerns, not to mention the MTA's budget woes, opponents of the plan are pushing for adoption of an option called the Upper Level Loop Alternative. It would route LIRR trains onto existing Metro North tracks into Grand Central, avoiding the perceived perils of having a concourse buried deep below Park Avenue, while saving billions of dollars.

Ms. Heffernan called the alternative "fatally flawed," saying the loop option would cut service to Metro North by 50% during the extended construction period and by 30% when both systems are working at full capacity.

"I don't know why you would want to save a few billions of dollars to build a transportation system that on the first day is overcrowded and cuts service to Metro North," Ms. Heffernan said at last week's community meeting.

A serious look into the Upper Level Loop Alternative would require a new environmental impact study, Ms. Heffernan said, which would lead to a three-year delay, resulting in the "same cost for a far inferior service."

Another concern expressed by East Side residents is whether the proposed $16.8 billion Second Avenue subway line will be completed before East Side Access. If not, they worry that the influx of LIRR commuters would aggravate overcrowding of the Lexington Avenue subway line. The first phase of the Second Avenue subway project, a segment from 96th Street south that would connect to the Sixth Avenue line at E. 63rd Street, is expected by 2012 and has a price tag of $3.8 billion.

"If you bring in East Side Access to Grand Central, it will place a tremendous burden on what is already the most crowded form of transportation in the country, the Lexington Avenue line," Mr. Bing said. "Without putting comparable funding for the Second Avenue line, it will make overcrowding even worse."

Although the LIRR-Grand Central connection is also scheduled for completion by 2012, many wonder if that goal can be reached, as the MTA struggles for funds.

Governor Pataki, in releasing his budget last month, called for an allocation of $19.2 billion for the MTA over the next five years, $8.5 billion less than requested. A significantly reduced capital budget, MTA officials have said, would make it extremely difficult to do anything beyond maintaining the current mass-transit system.

East Side Access and the Second Avenue subway both got a boost this week when the Federal Transit Administration made the two Manhattan mass-transit projects the only ones out of 27 nationwide that it labeled "highly recommended."

"It's a great vote of confidence for this project," Rep. Peter King, a Long Island Republican who supports East Side Access, said.

The federal agency has proposed spending $390 million on East Side Access in fiscal 2006. Paul Griffo, a spokesman for the agency, told the Sun yesterday that congressional approval was likely.

Ultimately, the federal government is expected to pitch in a total of $2.6 billion for East Side Access, with the MTA financing the remainder. On other projects, Mr. Griffo said, when state money is not available on schedule or projects go over budget, his agency seeks to guide the work back on track.

"We put on the brakes. We'll say, we need to see a plan to get you back on course here," he said. "But the FTA is satisfied that the MTA has demonstrated its ability to fulfill their end."

Today's public hearing is being held at MTA headquarters, 347 Madison Ave. Doors open at 5 p.m.

Assemblyman Bing said the MTA has a history of holding public hearings even though its officials have "already made up their minds."

"But," he said, "we want them to know that the people who live and work in this area really don't think this is a good idea."

The period for written public comment on East Side Access ends on February 22.

URL: http://www.nysun.com/article/8991

[Kris]

February 11, 2005

M.T.A. Vent Is Opposed by Church

By SEWELL CHAN

http://graphics8.nytimes.com/images/dropcap/t.gifhe Roman Catholic Archdiocese of New York announced its opposition yesterday to a plan to erect a 16-story ventilation facility on a crowded block in Midtown, throwing its influence behind a group of land owners, preservationists, elected officials and local residents who are bitterly fighting the project.

The Metropolitan Transportation Authority's engineers believe that the proposed facility, on East 50th Street between Madison and Park Avenues, is essential to provide adequate ventilation for new tunnels and a new terminal to be built as part of the planned extension of the Long Island Rail Road to Grand Central Terminal.

At a hearing last night, the 24 people who testified were unanimous in their opposition. They focused their anger on an environmental assessment, completed last month, which concluded that the building would not have negative effects on land use, traffic, air quality, noise, public safety and the environment.

A lawyer for the archdiocese, Richard G. Leland, said the assessment had "fundamental defects." He said the study did not properly analyze alternatives to the facility, or its effects on traffic, air quality and the historic character of the neighborhood.

Mr. Leland, who has been hired by the archbishop, Cardinal Edward M. Egan, noted that the facility would be a half-block from St. Patrick's Cathedral, at "the heart of Catholic life in New York City." He said the project "poses a serious security risk" and would be "a veritable terrorist target if built."

He said the authority had failed to consider the security risks of housing an 8,000-gallon fuel tank, two emergency generators, cooling towers and an electrical substation in a densely populated business district.

If a terrorist attack involving toxic gases occurred, Mr. Leland said, the facility would emit air onto 50th Street at a rate of 800,000 cubic feet per minute without any way to detect the presence of the toxic gases and shut the facility down.

Among the other nonprofit and civic groups that sent representatives to testify against the project were the Municipal Art Society of New York, the New York Landmarks Conservancy and the Yale Club of New York City.

Lawyers for owners of nearby property have already filed a lawsuit to stop the project, and they thronged last night's hearing. But the authority also heard from Bruce A. Silberblatt, 77, who said his neighborhood of Turtle Bay would be inundated with traffic, and Ashley Newton, 41, a waiter who said the noisy construction would scare customers away and ruin his livelihood.

Before the testimony began, an official from the authority attempted to allay the concerns of the project's opponents.

The official, Joseph J. Petrocelli, said the authority already owned and safely operated "dozens of above-ground ventilation buildings located in residential and commercial areas throughout the City of New York." Many other buildings in the East 50th Street area, he said, have loading docks, emergency generators, fuel tanks of equal or greater size and cooling towers on their roofs.

Douglas R. Sussman, the authority's director of community affairs, said the public could continue to comment on the environmental assessment until Feb. 22.

Copyright 2005 (http://www.nytimes.com/ref/membercenter/help/copyright.html) The New York Times Company (http://www.nytco.com/)

[mkeit]

Is this project still alive?

Bids were opened in August for two major contracts-over $ 300 million. I have not heard of any awards. The last contract for the " starter" tunnels seems to have been terminated because the rock was too hard (!!) for the planned method.

[mkeit]

I found a news article on tunnellingonline.com which mentions the Slattery contract-$ 362 million- for the Manhattan tunnels. They list the personnel, so I guess the contract is signed. Again-no mention publicly.

[mkeit]

This is it-

East Side Access
Skanska-Slattery/Traylor Bros./ Judlau S/T/J JV
This $362.3 million project for the Metropolitan Transportation Authority will connect the Long Island Railroad Tunnels constructed in the 1970s from Queens to Second Avenue to the Grand Central Terminal in mid-Manhattan. Initially the joint venture will mine two approach tunnels and an erection chamber to assemble the two TBMs.

From the assembly chamber on 63rd Street, two hard rock TBMs (22 ft in diameter) will excavate two single tunnels diagonally from 62nd Street and Second Avenue to Park Avenue, then turn south to 38th Street approximately 7,500 lf. The TBMs will be backed to 59th Street, where two large, high speed bifurcation chambers, 500-ft long, opening to a maximum width of 54-ft will be excavated. The TBMs will be reassembled and then drive two parallel tunnels from the bifurcation to 38th Street.

The excavation of four additional bifurcations will be required, followed by four more TBM tunnels, which will terminate at 43rd Street and Park Avenue. Eight underground chambers, eight starter tunnels, two approach tunnels and 25,000 lf of TBM-mined tunnel will be constructed over a 50-month period.

With no access in Manhattan for men or materials, everything will be transported 9,000 ft from Queens to the worksite. A mega transportation rail system will carry 20,000 cu yds of shotcrete, support material, powder, rock bolts and all other material. Muck from the tunnels and chambers totaling 900,000 cu yds will be transported to Queens in muck cars with diesel locomotives, where it will be transferred to conveyors and carried to Long Island Railroad gondola cars for transport to fill areas on Long Island.
tunnellingonline.com


It suggests that conveyors will span Northern Blvd to carry the spoil to the LIRR yards.

[TonyO]

MTA unveils revamped East Side Access plan

BY CHUCK BENNETT
amNew York STAFF WRITER

December 7, 2005

After a year of pressure from business bigwigs, local pols and even the Catholic Church, the MTA made public Tuesday a substantially redesigned ventilation system for its plan to connect the Long Island Rail Road and Grand Central Terminal.

Originally, the $6.3-billion project, known as East Side Access, called for a 150-foot-tall ventilation tower on East 50th Street between Madison and Park Avenues. The tower would pump out air from the train tunnels and platforms 155 feet below ground.

But critics said the proposed tower, located a block from St. Patrick's Cathedral and Saks Fifth Avenue, would create a public-health hazard and traffic nightmare.

Critics said the tower would bring in extra delivery and sanitation trucks, as well as produce "visible mist" from close-to-the-ground cooling towers that could carry Legionnaires' disease. They also argued that 8,000 gallons of diesel fuel to power back-up generators was a potential bomb.

The new plan moves the exhaust vents elsewhere and places the cooling towers atop neighboring 300 Park Ave., an office building.

It places the fuel tanks off site, removes the truck-loading dock from East 50th Street, cuts construction time from six to two years, and even provides a small park.

The MTA hopes to have the East Side connection completed by 2012.

"Certainly, the MTA made an effort to address the concerns raised by me and other community residents," said Assemblyman Jonathan Bing (D-Manhattan).
Copyright © 2005, Newsday, Inc.

[billyblancoNYC]

This, along with the 3rd rail expansion of the main line and the proposed link to JFK and Downtown would be a real boon for both the city and LI. This might make LI somewhat more attractive for former NYC folks to move to when considering the burbs. Right now, Westchester, Northern NJ and even CT seem to always beat out LI for Manhattan refugees.

[NIMBYkiller]

The 3rd TRACK(3rd rail already exists there) is more for NYC residents who commute TO LI, but it will also make room for more peak direction service too.

JFK-Manhattan is a dead boondoggle and is the biggest waste of an idea I've ever heard of.

LIRR to downtown is not happening for a LLLLLLOOOOOOOOOOOONNNG time

[TonyO]

NY Daily News
Off the fast track

Rising costs hit LIRR plan for Grand Central

BY PETE DONOHUE
DAILY NEWS STAFF WRITER

The MTA's plan to bring Long Island Rail Road trains into Grand Central Terminal is getting more and more expensive - and could reach $7.7 billion by the time the digging's done.
The Metropolitan Transportation Authority says the extension, which involves a major expansion of the historic 42nd St. depot, will cost $6.3 billion.

But the authority hasn't revised that figure since December 2003, even though steel and other key materials are more expensive now. Experts say the cost is sure to rise - and even the feds, who are being counted on for much of the funding, have put the price tag at $7.7 billion.

"The longer you wait to build these things, the more they cost," said Jeremy Soffin of the Regional Plan Association. An MTA spokeswoman said the agency is sticking to its figure.

Extending LIRR into Grand Central would shorten commutes for many Long Islanders, supporters say.

But some advocates and experts gripe the so-called East Side Access project has been hampered by waning support from Gov. Pataki, an early booster who in recent years has pushed for a rail link between Kennedy Airport and lower Manhattan.

"Pataki's got to make up his mind," Gene Russianoff of the Straphangers Campaign said. "If he keeps asking the feds for billions for both . . . New York will wind up with nothing."

The MTA stalled the launch of the big dig in Manhattan - extending an existing tunnel from Queens to Grand Central and excavating a huge cavern for new platforms beneath the terminal - after Pataki didn't fill its funding request for the 2005-2009 capital plan.

The MTA last year held off awarding tunneling contracts as it waited for voters in November to approve a bond act generating $450 million.

The time lag forced the MTA recently to solicit bids a second time. Contracts now may be awarded this spring.

The shortfall in state support also has made it tougher to get a long-term funding commitment from the feds.

"It's a big problem," veteran MTA board member Barry Feinstein said.

Some advocates are urging the MTA to look at a less expensive alternative that would take greater advantage of tracks and platforms currently at Grand Central. An MTA spokeswoman declined to comment on that possibility.

[mkeit]

It has been so long since anyone has written about this, I couldn't find the thread.

The MTA is keeping a low profile on this now.

The new bids for the Queens Open Cut were opened in April and a contract was awarded a week later. Work began 2 weeks ago with no publicity.

The low bid in 2004 was $ 55 million. The same bidder ( Pile Foundation Construction) was the low bidder this time at $ 83 million

The bids for the Manhattan Tunnel excavation were opened on Tuesday. The low bidder-a large Spanish construction company with very little history in the US came in at $ 427 million. The rejected 2004 low bid was $ 375 million.

[ryan]

All the small retail next to my office on 50th (mad/park) is in the process of closing for this project.

[NYatKNIGHT]

I just merged the last two posts into the existing thread, changed the title, and moved it to this forum. Should be easier to find now.

[americasroof]

Maybe this thread is being covered in a different thread but I couldn't easily find it. The project sure seems to be active including a May 17 hearing with lots of MTA docs:
http://www.mta.nyc.ny.us/capconstr/esas/ea50.htm
http://www.mta.nyc.ny.us/capconstr/esas/index.html

It's now budgeted at $6.4 billion and still scheduled for completion in 2012
. If you lost track of this. The LIRR trains would go from Sunnyside Yards across the East River via the 63rd Street tunnel and then down Park Avenue 90 feet below the existing Metro North tracks (170+ feet below Park Avenue!).

No doubt the LIRR is banking on this (noting that 50 percent of its riders say Grand Central rather than Penn Station is closer to work) and that's why they aren't jumping to the new Moynihan Station.

Here's some other articles.

http://www.nysun.com/article/8991
http://www.localexpression.com/esa.html

[NYatKNIGHT]

Thanks for the update.

Not sure why it was hard for you to find, if you used the Search function all the key words are in the title, all transit improvements are in this Guide for New Yorkers forum, and it was already at the top of the page.

[americasroof]

All the small retail next to my office on 50th (mad/park) is in the process of closing for this project.
That's where an air vent is going in (disguised as a regular building).

Nose around the official MTA site, you will find a lot on the project
http://www.mta.nyc.ny.us/capconstr/esas/index.html

It's amazing that something so big is nearly invisible on the public radar.

Note to NY Knight. I didn't quite understand the heirarchy for placement. It's clear now. Thanks.

[Ed007Toronto]

Rather than head to Grand Central via 63rd, why didn't they just double up the tunnels heading to Penn Station and from there head north into Grand Central? Then you could of had NJ trains going to Grand Central and other new routes. Would have meant less tunnelling in Manhattan.

[Dynamicdezzy]

To my knowledge, any tunnels leading to or from penn station are at full capacity. Plus, the 63rd tunnel is already completed. It uses the same tunnel as the "F" train. There is only a need to extend it to grand central with its own platform and concourse.

[ablarc]

Plus, the 63rd tunnel is already completed. It uses the same tunnel as the "F" train.
Same tunnel --and also same tracks? Will the LIRR trains run on the subway tracks?

[TranspoMan]

Same tunnel --and also same tracks? Will the LIRR trains run on the subway tracks?
The 63rd Street tunnel was built with two levels - the upper level for the subway and the lower level for the LIRR.

[ablarc]

The 63rd Street tunnel was built with two levels - the upper level for the subway and the lower level for the LIRR.
Well, that was foresightful of them. So, what's taking so long to press that other level into use? You'd think they would have finished it all at once.

We need some of that good ol' Chinese derring-do.

[americasroof]

Same tunnel --and also same tracks? Will the LIRR trains run on the subway tracks?
The tunnel has two levels. The LIRR would be on the lower level.

[ablarc]

The tunnel has two levels. The LIRR would be on the lower level.
Don't all answer at the same time. ;)

[americasroof]

Well, that was foresightful of them. So, what's taking so long to press that other level into use? You'd think they would have finished it all at once.

The tunnel through East River was the easy part. Tunneling through Manhattan is another story.

[Scruffy88]

This is all great. What about metro North trains to Penn station via the amtrak tracks and the split in New Rochelle?

[ablarc]

This is all great. What about metro North trains to Penn station via the amtrak tracks and the split in New Rochelle?
Yeah!

Then, all that would be left to complete the picture would be New Jersey Transit to Grand Central. Commuter trains could travel right through Manhattan. A one-seat ride from Princeton to New Haven, from Poughkeepsie to Babylon.

[americasroof]

This is all great. What about metro North trains to Penn station via the amtrak tracks and the split in New Rochelle?
http://www.mta.nyc.ny.us/mta/planning/psas/images/alternativesmap.gif
That's actually being considered.

About half of LIRR's trains would go out of Grand Central (24 of 42 trains/hour at peak). Metro North trains would then be allowed to enter Penn.

In the for what it's worth department Metro North and the LIRR are separate organizations with separate board of directors under the MTA umbrella and there's some incompabilities in their rolling stock! Each year legislation is introduced to combine them and it never goes anywhere -- thanks largely to folks who don't want to see the LIRR name disappear. It's the oldest railroad running under the same name in the country.

[TranspoMan]

Part of the problem might be that the financing for rolling stock on the New Haven Line of Metro-North is controlled by the Connecticut State Department of Transportation (not New York State like on the Harlem and Hudson lines).

[Ed007Toronto]

To my knowledge, any tunnels leading to or from penn station are at full capacity. Plus, the 63rd tunnel is already completed. It uses the same tunnel as the "F" train. There is only a need to extend it to grand central with its own platform and concourse.

I know that the 63rd tunnel is already completed. I meant originally before they built the 63rd tunnel why did they decide to go with the north route rather than one to the south that could have also allowed a direct route between Penn and Grand Central.

[TomAuch]

Part of the problem might be that the financing for rolling stock on the New Haven Line of Metro-North is controlled by the Connecticut State Department of Transportation (not New York State like on the Harlem and Hudson lines).

WOnder how they could get the Harlem Line over to Penn Station?

[tmg]

WOnder how they could get the Harlem Line over to Penn Station?

The Initial Screening Results Report (http://www.mta.info/mta/planning/psas/pdf/initial_screen_results.pdf) considered several ways to do this, but ultimately rejected them because they could not be accomplished without additional capital investment. Aside from the optional cost of building new stations, running the Hudson and New Haven lines to Penn will have minimal cost (once East Side Access is complete).

[pianoman11686]

June 15, 2006

City Is Asked to Rethink Rail Stations Deep Underground

By THOMAS J. LUECK

Warning that new rail stations planned for as deep as 15 stories under Manhattan could be targets of terror, five transit riders' groups from New York and New Jersey have asked the city to reconsider the risk of building them.

In a letter dated May 2 to New York City's senior police, fire and emergency management officials, the riders' groups asserted that "deep caverns" are poorly suited to Manhattan in the aftermath of the attack on the World Trade Center.

"In this age of concern about terrorism," the groups' said in the letter, "we respectfully request that you do a careful risk assessment of these deep cavern stations."

The projects include New Jersey Transit's proposal for new Hudson River tunnels and a rail station as deep as 100 feet below Macy's on 34th Street, and the Metropolitan Transportation Authority's long-planned $7.7 billion East Side Access project, which would link the Long Island Rail Road to a station 150 feet beneath Grand Central Terminal.

"As many as 8,000 passengers could be trapped in these terminals in the event of an emergency," the groups assert in the letter.

The letter was made available by the riders' groups after they obtained a copy of a June 7 response, sent by the police to Peter S. Kalikow, chairman of the Metropolitan Transportation Authority.

The transit advocates said they felt slighted after reading the police letter, signed by Lowell L. Stahl, assistant chief commanding officer, in which he asked that Mr. Kalikow take "any action you deem appropriate" in response to the groups' warning. The transit groups had sent their letter to Police Commissioner Raymond W. Kelly.

The Police Department's chief spokesman, Paul J. Browne, said in an interview this week that the department had long been aware of the security concerns surrounding deep rail stations, particularly the one planned under Grand Central, where passengers would descend more than a dozen stories on 16 high-speed escalators.

"The counterterrorism bureau has looked at the project," he said, but declined to elaborate. "It does not discuss questions of vulnerability."

The five transit groups, which also sent a copy of the letter to the Homeland Security secretary, Michael Chertoff, are the Straphangers Campaign, the Empire State Passengers Association, the Institute for Rational Urban Mobility in New York, the New Jersey Association of Railroad Passengers and the Lackawanna Coalition in New Jersey.

They said that none of the New York officials or agencies had responded directly to their letter, nor had anyone on Mr. Chertoff's staff.

Transit officials and engineers maintain that the new stations must be placed deep underground to avoid the layers of utilities, foundations and other rail lines already extending deep under Manhattan.

They also point out that deep rail platforms are nothing new to New York and other cities. In Manhattan, examples include the A line's station at 190th Street, where some passengers take an elevator 210 feet between the station and Fort Washington Avenue; others leave the station by walking through a tunnel to Bennett Avenue. And at Lexington Avenue and 63rd Street on the F line, escalators take riders 140 feet down to the station. But those stations were "built before 9/11, and the world has changed," said Gene Russianoff, staff attorney for the Straphangers Campaign.

His group has long advocated the East Side Access project as critical to the city's mass transit system, and "we still support the concept," Mr. Russianoff said. But he said the group is not convinced that potential difficulties in access and emergency evacuation have received enough attention. "I have an open mind," Mr. Russianoff said, "but I just don't want people to be subjected to unsafe conditions."

George Haikalis, president of the Institute for Rational Urban Mobility and a longtime critic of the deep rail projects, has been advocating an alternative method of getting the Long Island Rail Road to Grand Central on tracks under Park Avenue owned by Metro-North Railroad.

Mr. Haikalis said the stations being planned deep underground would be too expensive, and dangerous. "These are inviting targets because they are so far down and enclosed," he said.

Security concerns over the East Side Access project have not escaped the attention of the Fire Department. But the project, which Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg staunchly supports, has not been publicly questioned or criticized by fire officials.

In May, WNYC radio reported on a rift in 2003 between the transportation authority and fire officials over access to the planned station and passageways under Grand Central. It obtained correspondence between the authority and a fire official through the Freedom of Information Law.

In one letter, according to the WNYC report, Capt. Robert Weinman of the Fire Department wrote to an official at the authority, "You must take into account" the "experience and expertise of the Fire Department that you will be calling upon to protect your passengers, employees, property and equipment in the event of an incident."

The disagreement has been resolved, though neither the authority nor fire officials are willing to discuss details.

In an interview this week, Francis X. Gribbon, the Fire Department's chief spokesman, said "we were given what we asked for."

"It involved access points and things like that," he said, declining to be more specific. "They had their ideas, and we had ours, but they satisfied the concerns we raised."

Timothy O'Brien, a spokesman for the transportation authority, said it was in close contact with police and fire officials about many security issues.

Copyright 2006 The New York Times Company

[ablarc]

The terrorists are vital participants in New York's transportation planning.

[BPC]

The terrorists are vital participants in New York's transportation planning.

They've already entered architecture and urban planning. Why shouldn't they enter transportation planning as well? We should also scour our public school curriculums to make sure there is nothing in the school books that might upset the terrorists. If we do everything right, then New York City will never be a terrorist target again.

[lofter1]

We should also scour our public school curriculums to make sure there is nothing in the school books that might upset the terrorists. If we do everything right, then New York City will never be a terrorist target again.
don't forget our cultural facilities ...

[BigMac]

AM New York
June 16, 2006

Grand Central LIRR terminal to go ahead

BY HERBERT LOWE
Newsday Staff Writer

Plans for a new Long Island Rail Road station at Grand Central Terminal are moving ahead despite claims by some rider groups that the threat of terrorism is being ignored, Metropolitan Transportation Authority officials said Thursday.

"I have full confidence that the security concerns of everyone have been reviewed as part of the design for East Side Access, and I don't see any reason at the moment to make any changes," said Mitchell Pally, the Suffolk County representative on the MTA board of directors.

The authority's $7.7 billion East Side Access project, due to be completed in 2013, would link the LIRR to a station 150 feet beneath Grand Central Terminal.

In recent weeks, advocacy groups have complained to New York City police, fire and emergency management officials that, in the post-9/11 era, it is irresponsible to build a new station 15 stories below street level.

"As many as 8,000 passengers could be trapped in these terminals in the event of an emergency," the New Jersey Association of Railroad Passengers, Empire State Passengers Association, Lackawanna Coalition, Straphangers Campaign and Institute for Rational Urban Mobility wrote in a joint letter sent to various officials.

George Haikalis, president of the institute, has long championed an alternative plan for the new terminal: getting the LIRR trains to Grand Central on existing tracks under Park Avenue owned by Metro-North Railroad. Those tracks are only 20 feet below street level, Haikalis said.

"In this age of terrorism, why put people in these caverns?" he said.

MTA officials say they have studied Haikalis' idea and concluded that, if implemented, it would impede Metro-North's ability to function in the terminal along with the LIRR. The officials also say they don't have any choice but to build the stations so deep underground.

"This is the only way we could build this project because of the existing utility lines and commuter rail and subway tunnels," said Timothy O'Brien, a spokesman for the authority. "We have to go underneath them. That's what dictates the depths."

O'Brien also said several subway stations across the city and in other major cities, including London and Madrid, are at least 150 feet below street level.

Deputy Police Commissioner Paul Browne said the department's counterterrorism bureau has reviewed the East Side Access project. Browne declined to discuss the matter, saying the department does not comment publicly on potential vulnerabilities of such projects.

Copyright 2006 AM New York

[TonyO]

NY1


MTA Awards Contract For East Side Access Tunnel

July 13, 2006

The East Side Access project is slowly becoming a reality: A Spanish firm has been awarded a huge contract to build a tunnel underneath Park Avenue to allow Long Island Rail Road trains access to Grand Central Terminal.

The LIRR will be linked to an existing subway tunnel at 63rd Street, but a new tunnel must be built from the Manhattan end of that tunnel and Second Avenue, over to Park Avenue and down to Grand Central.

"It’s very important for 75,000 people who now commute into Manhattan from the suburbs and they end up on the west side of Manhattan at Penn Station and this will bring them into Grand Central, where many of them have their work,” said Gene Russianoff of the Straphangers Campaign.

This will be a joint venture between a company in College Point, Queens, and the one in Spain. The $430 million contract amount is less than expected because the Spanish firm already has the necessary tunneling machinery.

The MTA hopes to have the project completed by 2013.

[kliq6]

dont bet on 2013 if the MTA is running the show, they take four years to rehab a subway station

[pianoman11686]

http://www.3d-win.com

Renderings by DMJM + Harris

http://www.3d-win.com/web/bbs/data/gal_java/46$3$08L.jpg

http://www.3d-win.com/web/bbs/data/gal_java/45$3$07L.jpg

http://www.3d-win.com/web/bbs/data/gal_java/44$3$06L.jpg

http://www.3d-win.com/web/bbs/data/gal_java/43$3$05L.jpg

http://www.3d-win.com/web/bbs/data/gal_java/42$3$04L.jpg

http://www.3d-win.com/web/bbs/data/gal_java/41$3$03L.jpg

http://www.3d-win.com/web/bbs/data/gal_java/40$3$02L.jpg

http://www.3d-win.com/web/bbs/data/gal_java/39$3$01L.jpg

The 50th Street ventilation building:

http://www.3d-win.com/web/bbs/data/exteriorP/103$3$08L.jpg

http://www.3d-win.com/web/bbs/data/exteriorP/102$3$07L.jpg

[TonyO]

snazzy.

[ablarc]

Looks suspiciously like the present Penn Station.

[Deimos]

Looks suspiciously like the present Penn Station.
I disagree... it looks like the pedestrian walkways are designed to make sense. The current Penn Station is so poorly organized it would be better to say its just a collection of walkways that happen to meet up with some train tracks (with the exception of the Amtrak section, I like that train station).

My fear with this project is that the LIRR section of the station will feel like a different station from the Metro-North section. This would make it exactly like Penn where NJ Transit, LIRR and Amtrak are basically 3 separate stations sharing the same 32 tracks (or whatever the number is). I realize that there will be a degree of disconnect from the two stations due to the space between them, but in a perfect world, tracks 201-208 will simply feel like another sublevel like tracks 101-117.

[MikeW]

Actually the reworking of the LIRR concourse was a major improvement to Penn Station. If you used the LIRR, it made things much more efficient. It also made it more pleasent (or at least less unpleasent). Penn Station was a major dump before the renovation.

I disagree... it looks like the pedestrian walkways are designed to make sense. The current Penn Station is so poorly organized it would be better to say its just a collection of walkways that happen to meet up with some train tracks (with the exception of the Amtrak section, I like that train station).

My fear with this project is that the LIRR section of the station will feel like a different station from the Metro-North section. This would make it exactly like Penn where NJ Transit, LIRR and Amtrak are basically 3 separate stations sharing the same 32 tracks (or whatever the number is). I realize that there will be a degree of disconnect from the two stations due to the space between them, but in a perfect world, tracks 201-208 will simply feel like another sublevel like tracks 101-117.

[ablarc]

As I said...

[ryan]

Looks suspiciously like the present Penn Station.
I'll agree, but the terrazzo looks much shiny-er.

The ventilation building replaces my favorite deli, but I won't mind having a park next door... if I keep the same job for 20 years.

[TonyO]

10/18/06
NY Daily News

Feds OK $2.65B for LIRR ride to the East Side

The last big hurdle in extending the Long Island Rail Road to the East Side was cleared yesterday when the Bush administration approved a $2.65 billion grant for the project.
"It's a great day for New York. This deal is done," said Rep. Pete King (R-L.I.). "This guarantees the project will be done."

The Federal Transit Administration sent its funding proposal yesterday to Congress for approval after a 60-day review. King said he didn't anticipate any snags because transportation committees in both houses have endorsed the plan.

"I look forward to the signing of the final full-funding grant agreement and the benefits it will bring to our region," Gov. Pataki said.

The federal dollars represent about 40% of the $6.3 billion needed for the project. The remainder of the funds will come from local and state sources, and through the selling of bonds.

The so-called East Side Access project will bring LIRR commuters into Grand Central Terminal. The project also includes a new commuter rail station in Sunnyside, Queens.

The project is expected to be completed by 2013, and will serve up to 180,000 riders daily.

"East Side Access is a vital project for the future viability of our region's economy, and I look forward to signing the full-funding agreement by the end of this year," MTA Chairman Peter Kalikow said.


Bill Hutchinson

[Eugenious]

dont bet on 2013 if the MTA is running the show, they take four years to rehab a subway station

They have been installing the escalators and elevators at 34th st Herald Sq station for what seems to be an eternity. Are there not enough contractors in the city to do the job?

[lofter1]

it seems that elevators throught the MTA system are a joke -- they had to be installed to meet the Disabilities Act, but maintenance by MTA is seemingly zero on elevators, which makes like all that more difficult for handicapped / wheelchair bound citizens :mad: .

[ramvid01]

There's a lot of work already being done at the Sunnyside Yards that i believe has to do with this project. I believe i counted about 8 cranes on the site doing some kind of work.

[Strattonport]

As part of this connection, a LIRR station is to be constructed in Sunnyside. I would like to see a truly intermodal complex be linked up with the nearby subway and bus lines.

[TonyO]

NY Observer

Beneath Their Stations
While Connecticut snobs bask in Grand Central’s marble glow, New Jersey and Long Island commuters have to brave dingy Penn Station. But, as SARA VILKOMERSON reports, this delicate caste system may be facing a rail revolution.

By: Sara Vilkomerson
Date: 11/6/2006
Page: 17


During a recent and rainy rush hour at Penn Station, dripping umbrellas and dirt tracked in from squeaky sneakers and soggy loafers added to the standard feeling of despair among New Jersey Transit and Long Island Rail Road commuters trying to get home. The air was thick and humid with anxiety, and it smelled like a combination of wet hair, hot dogs and defeat.

“There’s a low-ceiling alienation to the place,” said New York Times writer David Carr, who regularly takes the New Jersey Transit Midtown Direct line from his home in Montclair, N.J. “I alternate between the bus, train and driving. It’s good to mix up the commute, otherwise you end up feeling like killing yourself.”

Meanwhile, across town at the cathedral-like Grand Central Terminal, Metro-North crowds moved easily beneath the aquamarine astronomical ceiling, so high and domed that whether through acoustics or sheer grandeur, all sounds below took on a civilized hush.

“Each station serves as a portal of your New York experience and sort of defines you,” Mr. Carr said. “You walk into Grand Central and you hear Wagner and Beethoven, and you feel part of the great human endeavor. You walk into Penn and you hear Psychedelic Furs or the Cure.”

The chasm between rail-rider identities is already a natural caste system deriving from where one commutes from: scrappy/trashy New Jersey and Long Island versus WASP-y old-money Connecticut. John Updike as opposed to Bon Jovi, Peyton Place compared to The Sopranos, Kenneth Cole against The Tiecoon, and so on.

The stations signal to commuters how New York feels about them. Connecticut and Westchester riders step off their trains to be greeted by the majesty of the Grand Central main concourse: the opal clock atop the information booth (estimated worth: $10 million to $20 million), sculptures of Minerva, Hercules and Mercury, gourmet coffee, bread and cheese. New Jersey and Long Islands riders expect to fight their way up broken escalators to begin a salmon-like upstream battle beneath fluorescent lights. The take-no-prisoner crowds swell against narrow passageways, pushing past the Auntie Anne’s pretzel carts and the ready-made Pizza Hut personal pies, considering entrance to one of the more terrifying bathrooms in Manhattan. Grand Central has a large and dignified American flag hanging from the ceiling since 9/11; Penn Station, judging from the number of armed soldiers, seems to be housing an Army barracks.

It’s no surprise that the East Side Access project, which proposes to bring the LIRR into Grand Central via an eight-track tunnel 140 feet below Park Avenue, has been greeted with some resistance. The LIRR usually dumps its Syosset-bred legions into the grimy underground of Penn Station. If the project, estimated at last count at $6.3 billion, were to go forward, Ralph Lauren–clad riders would have to mix with Juicy Couture tracksuits and cell phones that boast Bubba Sparxxx ringtones.

“The entire point of living in Connecticut or Westchester is to limit your exposure to people who are from Long Island and New Jersey,” said one magazine editor who has been commuting from Westport, Conn., through Grand Central for over a decade. “That’s why we live there, it’s why we wear natural fabrics, and it’s why we don’t stucco our homes. Granted, there are a lot of people in Westport and Darien who grew up on the island and vowed to end all the ridicule by buying a first home here, but these are the people who wear Nicole Miller and practically strive out loud. As far as we’re concerned, Long Island might as well be Barbados—fine for a vacation, but year-round is so not going to happen.”

“Oh yeah, they totally don’t want them there,” said Shane Hoffman, a Manhattan acupuncturist who experiences all three train rides visiting friends and family. “The LIRR is the most entertaining of the three, because of the Long Island yahoo people—it’s delicious! It’s such an amazing opportunity to see the styles from the era of Fame, plus there’s a nice sampling of construction workers going out for the night—totally different than the Metro-North people going to Greenwich or the strange smart people heading to New Haven, recognizable by their heavy books.”

Mini-factions have broken from these two warring commuter-groups. Many Garden State travelers heading through Penn Station are happy to be losing their Long Island brethren. Joni Noe, a 32-year-old photo editor and regular New Jersey Transit rider, said: “I’m not jealous about the LIRR going through Grand Central, if it means that those commuters won’t be going through Penn Station. Would that mean we won’t have to deal with as many New York Islander fans?”

Certainly there is something undeniably New York represented by both stations. Grand Central embodies the gilded glamour of a Truman Capote story: the whiff of promise of Fifth Avenue shops right outside its doors, Rockefeller Center and St. Patrick’s Cathedral, express subways that whisk the cashmere-coated straight to the Upper East Side. Penn Station carries with it the air of hard work, sweat and trying to make ends meet. The surrounding streets of Penn are filled with the industries of immigrants—the garment and fur districts.

“Grand Central has architecture and heft and scope and white marble and Kennedys backing the restoration. Penn Station has jerry-rigged plywood sheets with orange graffiti arrows,” the magazine editor from Westport continued. “In Grand Central, tourists gather in groups and point to the famous little spot on the ceiling they left intact—the one that shows how dirty the main waiting room was before the restoration. At Penn Station, people who point at the ceiling are remarking over how that pigeon managed to get in. Grand Central has a PBS feel about it. Penn Station is the WB.”



BUT FORGETTING, FOR A MOMENT, THE BIG-PICTURE differences of the stations, one need only look at the dining options available to both sets of commuters. Penn Station has T.G.I. Friday’s, Houlihan’s and every fast-food option available, in miniature.

“Aesthetics and claustrophobic symptoms aside, Grand Central is on its own plane, with nicer restaurants and shops,” said Ms. Noe. “They don’t have the lowbrow spots like Krispy Kreme, do they?” (Answer: no.)

Grand Central, in addition to fine dining restaurants like the Oyster Bar, Cipriani Dolci and Michael Jordan’s Steakhouse, boasts a “dining course” level below the main waiting area that puts any ordinary food court to shame: Masa Sushi, Junior’s, Café Spice and Mendy’s Kosher Deli. On a weekday lunch hour, nattily dressed workers descend upon the area, iPods in and heads bowed over The Times and the Post. There’s even a specialty market where commuters can stop by a butcher and pick up Godiva chocolates or Murray’s cheese on their way home.

“You just can’t buy nice olive oil in Penn Station,” said Mr. Hoffman.

Then there’s the little matter of how each station treats its passengers when it comes to the actual boarding of trains. At Grand Central, the track numbers are announced up to half an hour before the departure time, allowing riders to leisurely decide when to get on the train and find a seat. At Penn Station, there is a palpable anxiety as crowds gather around the large board of departures, or the tiny television monitors. Somewhere between seven and 10 minutes before departure, a track will be posted and a running of the commuters commences, a Lord of the Flies–like flurry to get down the escalator and into a seat.

“I used to run track, and it’s like a starter pistol going off,” said Cristina Tapper, an editorial assistant at People magazine who attended the New Jersey Transit–reachable Rutgers College but now commutes daily on Metro-North from Mount Vernon. “That clamor is the major difference that sticks out in my head. I just remember having to run for a seat at Penn Station.”

“As far as the rush-hour situation, here’s a true story, “ said Anne Gregory, a petite blonde who teaches physical education on the Upper East Side. “I once saw a guy who was practically body-checking his fellow riders when the track number was announced, only to be stopped when he heard a young voice yell, ‘Dad!’ In the insanity of trying to get to the escalator, he let go of his daughter’s hand and started tearing ass. She couldn’t have been older than 9.”

“Oh, it’s a total cluster-****,” said Mr. Hoffman. “If you get called to a track without an escalator, you’ll always end up behind the people with the luggage struggling down the stairs. Then it becomes about waiting: ‘Is that old guy going to be pushed down?’ It’s insane. I think the New Jersey Transit people are more respectful. The LIRR people’s exploding point seems to be much lower.”

Penn’s animals-in-a-cage feeling has a lot to do with the absence of seating. Grand Central riders have benches available to them, plus all the seats in the dining-concourse level. At Penn, it’s not uncommon to see business men in three-piece suits squatting on their briefcase. “Essentially, both places are staging areas for getting a seat,” said the Westport commuter. “I always get a great seat at Grand Central, which makes it a successful building. Never, ever in my entire life has my ass been happy at Penn Station.”

The original Penn Station, a glorious Beaux-Arts structure in pink granite and glass, was famously demolished (to great public horror) to make way for a multimillion-dollar sports complex in 1963. This memory of beauty on the West Side haunts the aesthetically afflicted Jersey natives. “One entered the city like a god, one scuttles in now like a rat,” wrote the architectural historian Vincent Scully. The powers-that-be at Penn Station have tried to make amends to their customers. There was a restoration of the New Jersey Transit waiting area in the late 1990’s to remove some of the grime. The area features a four-sided clock from the original station. But it hasn’t helped much, and most commuters don’t even use it, choosing to stick by the big board with its seemingly random changing of numbers. You never know when yours will come up.

“There’s just … there’s this sag in front of the board, where you look at your now fellow inmates, trapped on this island off the coast of America with no or little way home,” Mr. Carr continued. “There’s a collective sadness that drops over the place.”

But there’s also hope. In 1998, the late Senator Daniel Patrick Moynihan started an official movement to create a new Penn Station across the street in the Farley Post Office Building. Drawings of the proposed building show an airy main room and glass ceilings. The project has become a bit of a political hot potato and is currently in limbo.

“I’m hoping I’m still gainfully employed long enough to experience it,” said Mr. Carr. “The fact that it didn’t happen yet is a significant failure of leadership—the fact that we have to re-engineer one of the worst ideas that ever was in the first place. I don’t care if it takes a long time and gobs and gobs of money. When it comes to bridge and tunnel, we should all be treated equally.”

copyright © 2006 the new york observer, llc | all rights reserved

[tmg]

Trash journalism, based on nothing but stereotypes. The Observer should be embarrassed by itself.

The Onion could have done a much better job with this article idea.

[Eugenious]

Trash journalism, based on nothing but stereotypes. The Observer should be embarrassed by itself.

The Onion could have done a much better job with this article idea.

But it's true.

[pianoman11686]

It befuddles me that a structure so renowned for its opulence - Grand Central - is also so much more successful in fulfilling its function. At the same time, the labyrinthian Penn Station is nowhere near deserving of aesthetic appreciation, yet it's an unquestionable failure as a structure that was built in the era of Modernism, where it was assumed we'd gain function by eliminating opulence. What went wrong in the planning?

[Fahzee]

NY Observer

....“You just can’t buy nice olive oil in Penn Station,” said Mr. Hoffman.



This should be the new rallying cry for the Moynihan Station.

[MikeW]

I don't buy you premise, or at least the second half. Yes, GCS is much more aesthetically pleasing. But I don't agree that it is any more efficient or effective as a transportation hub. If you look at simply the act of moving the mass of commuters on and of the trains, and onto connecting subways, they two stations do a pretty equal job of it. GCS just provides a better ambience to do it in.

It befuddles me that a structure so renowned for its opulence - Grand Central - is also so much more successful in fulfilling its function. At the same time, the labyrinthian Penn Station is nowhere near deserving of aesthetic appreciation, yet it's an unquestionable failure as a structure that was built in the era of Modernism, where it was assumed we'd gain function by eliminating opulence. What went wrong in the planning?

[pianoman11686]

Have you ever taken a train from Penn Station? Or, God forbid, had to transfer from a train to a subway? It's hell trying to find your way through all the different corridors.

My point is fairly simple: Grand Central has one, centralized area for passengers, with tracks surrounding it on all sides, and departure information laid out efficiently. Penn is a maze, on the other hand. It takes much longer to get from your train to the street, or to another subway, depending on where you are.

Doesn't it sound illogical that a station whose promoters sought to achieve efficiency by tearing down something ornate, and outdated, is woefully inadequate at fulfilling its function? And that's it's outdone by something much older, and much more opulent?

[lofter1]

The transfer from "real" trains to the subway in GCT is no picnic either ...

[ramvid01]

I guess the easiness you talk about pianoman has to do with the fact that GCP has a main hall with windows, and if truely lost you can go outside (but then again I don't find GCP too hard to navigate, but I don't know Penn that well). Penn Station suffers more from lack of light then anything, I don't think being underground with no access to natural light helps, probably has some kind of psychological explanation.

[ablarc]

I don't think being underground with no access to natural light helps, probably has some kind of psychological explanation.
Turns us into Morlocks. You can read all about it in The Time Machine.

[lofter1]

And when a morlock (http://www.giantsandgirls.com/beyond2.html) goes after Yviette Mimieux (http://www.2neatmagazines.com/covers/1960cover/1960-May-9.jpg) -- that's scarrier than the dark recesses of Penn Station ...

http://www.giantsandgirls.com/images/beyond/timemach4.jpg

[TonyO]

NY Times
December 16, 2006

Spitzer Names Port Authority Head and Fills 11 Other Top Positions

By PATRICK HEALY and WILLIAM NEUMAN
Governor-elect Eliot Spitzer’s choice to lead the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey said yesterday that the Spitzer team would take a “fresh look” at the Freedom Tower project at ground zero.

Mr. Spitzer cautioned that it was premature to say whether plans would change, but the new Port Authority leader, Anthony E. Shorris, said there was little flexibility to make a major overhaul.

The comments came at a news conference where Mr. Spitzer named Mr. Shorris to be executive director of the Port Authority and also tapped 11 others for top jobs in his administration. Half of the appointees are current or former members of Mr. Spitzer’s staff in the attorney general’s office, and others, like Mr. Shorris and Priscilla Almodovar — his choice to be president of the state housing