Skip to main content

An F train express, East Side Access, and affordable housing

Mayor Mike Bloomberg's plan for better transit includes some good ideas, such as restoring express service on available F train tracks.

However, this idea wasn't new at all, though that was ignored in some initial coverage last month. Bloomberg's had eight years to make progress, as the Brooklyn Paper editorialized.

And the idea for an F train express has been around for a while, with the most recent push beginning in 2007 with a petition launched by Carroll Gardens activist (and now 39th District Council candidate) Gary Reilly. (Also see coverage by Second Avenue Sagas' Benjamin Kabak.)

The impact on housing

Also, hardly mentioned is an important side-effect of such improved transit: increased production of housing, and thus more affordable housing.

In other words, boosting infrastructure might be a better bet to produce affordable housing than unquestioning support for Atlantic Yards, a lesson AY boosters like Bill de Blasio (who also supports the F express) may not recognize.

(Could it be that there's no activist organization like ACORN behind the more generalized benefits of improved transit? Yes, I know the Straphangers Campaign supports the F Express, but they don't mobilize people the way ACORN does.)

Delays first

The F train express plan, however wise, would be delayed by needed infrastructure improvements. As NY1 reported way back in June 2007, in response to Reilly's effort:
But there is one big problem: plans to rehabilitate the Culver Viaduct — the elevated structure that carries trains over the Gowanus Canal from 4th Avenue to Carroll Street — would knock out the ability to use the express tracks.

Transit officials say work on these elevated tracks won't be complete until 2012 at the earliest, which means it'll be at least five years before they can even consider running F express service.

(Here are some more details on the work.)

The affordable housing impact

One of the solutions for affordable housing is alternative to subsidized construction: investment in transit. "[M]ass-transit investments (e.g., more express tracks to Brooklyn and Queens) would improve the quality of life for millions, rather than for a few who live in subsidized housing," argued the Manhattan Institute's Nicole Gelinas in a 12/12/06 New York Post op-ed.

Such service could lead to increased density--not necessarily high-rise buildings but mid-rise ones (five to nine or ten stories), and infill housing around subway stations.

Urban planner Alexander Garvin has similarly described how adding transit to Third Avenue in the Bronx and 21st Avenue in Astoria could lead to thousands of new housing units, thus--as I pointed out--lessening the pressure for "extreme density" at sites like the Atlantic Yards site.

A request in 2000

Bloomberg doesn't have money for the F express--though he did use city money for extension of the 7 line--and he controls only four of 14 votes on the MTA board.

Meanwhile, an MTA priority is the East Side Access project, to bring LIRR trains to Grand Central Station, which would now cost $7.2 billion, with an opening date in 2015, while an F train express would cost significantly less.

How much? I haven't seen a recent estimate, but, at an April 2000 conference at Baruch College of City University of New York, Brooklyn Ascendant: Metropolitan New York's Second City, transportation planner Carolyn Konheim of Community Consulting Services warned that the cost difference was a factor of one thousand. She then described East Side Access as a $4 billion project.

Konheim said:
You've heard about some wonderful long-range plans for transit, but right now that MTA capital plan does nothing for Brooklyn in terms of the new construction. We are the county with the largest number of transit riders and we're getting nothing more than fare hikes out of that new plan. If we invested less than five percent of the total cost of those big ticket items in projects that are ready to go in Brooklyn, we would cut more travel time faster and in just a few years than all of those long-range plans.

If we opened up the express line on the F train, we could serve as many riders as would be served by this four-billion-dollar link that will be built to Grand Central for Long Island Railroad commuters and at one-thousandth of the cost and we could do it in the next few years, and we would, therefore, if we did that we would make Coney Island and Gravesend and Park Slope and all those places, much more competitive in attracting families because why spend over an hour of commuting from these places if it's easier to do so from Nassau. So we are really penalizing the closed-in areas with this kind of plan and we're fostering the affluent and by that I mean the blue and green areas are the affluent areas surrounding our central city. And the region itself cannot continue this unbalance.

Bloomberg was elected a year later.

Nadler agrees

Eighth Congressional District Rep. Jerrold Nadler, which includes parts of Manhattan and Brooklyn, and serves on the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure. At the conference, he endorsed congestion pricing--tolling the East River bridges for truck traffic--and seconded Konheim's recommendations:
[W]e have to have some intelligent comprehensive transportation planning in New York, which we don't. Carolyn Konheim showed before a very interesting illustration in which she showed that the 4.3 billion dollar East Side Access Project, which is designed -- 4.3 billion is going ahead, Senator D'Amato was in favor of it, the government is still in favor of it, other are too, because it will save 110,000 Long Island commuters 30 minutes a day commuting. But a three-million dollar F Train improvement, which will save 110,000 people in Brooklyn 40 minutes commuting, that wasn't on the table for various political reasons.


Popular posts from this blog

Forest City acknowledges unspecified delays in Pacific Park, cites $300 million "impairment" in project value; what about affordable housing pledge?

Updated Monday Nov. 7 am: Note follow-up coverage of stock price drop and investor conference call and pending questions.

Pacific Park Brooklyn is seriously delayed, Forest City Realty Trust said yesterday in a news release, which further acknowledged that the project has caused a $300 million impairment, or write-down of the asset, as the expected revenues no longer exceed the carrying cost.

The Cleveland-based developer, parent of Brooklyn-based Forest City Ratner, which is a 30% investor in Pacific Park along with 70% partner/overseer Greenland USA, blamed the "significant impairment" on an oversupply of market-rate apartments, the uncertain fate of the 421-a tax break, and a continued increase in construction costs.

While the delay essentially confirms the obvious, given that two major buildings have not launched despite plans to do so, it raises significant questions about the future of the project, including:
if market-rate construction is delayed, will the affordable h…

Revising official figures, new report reveals Nets averaged just 11,622 home fans last season, Islanders drew 11,200 (and have option to leave in 2018)

The Brooklyn Nets drew an average of only 11,622 fans per home game in their most recent (and lousy) season, more than 23% below the announced official attendance figure, and little more than 65% of the Barclays Center's capacity.

The New York Islanders also drew some 19.4% below announced attendance, or 11,200 fans per home game.

The surprising numbers were disclosed in a consultant's report attached to the Preliminary Official Statement for the refinancing of some $462 million in tax-exempt bonds for the Barclays Center (plus another $20 million in taxable bonds). The refinancing should lower costs to Mikhail Prokhorov, owner of the arena operating company, by and average of $3.4 million a year through 2044 in paying off arena construction.

According to official figures, the Brooklyn Nets attendance averaged 17,187 in the debut season, 2012-13, 17,251 in 2013-14, 17,037 in 2014-15, and 15,125 in the most recent season, 2015-16. For hoops, the arena holds 17,732.

But official…

At 550 Vanderbilt, big chunk of apartments pitched to Chinese buyers as "international units"

One key to sales at the 550 Vanderbilt condo is the connection to China, thanks to Shanghai-based developer Greenland Holdings.

It's the parent of Greenland USA, which as part of Greenland Forest City Partners owns 70% of Pacific Park (except 461 Dean and the arena).

And sales in China may help explain how the developer was able to claim early momentum.
"Since 550 Vanderbilt launched pre-sales in June [2015], more than 80 residences have gone into contract, representing over 30% of the building’s 278 total residences," the developer said in a 9/25/15 press release announcing the opening of a sales gallery in Brooklyn. "The strong response from the marketplace indicates the high level of demand for well-designed new luxury homes in Brooklyn..."

Maybe. Or maybe it just meant a decent initial pipeline to Chinese buyers.

As lawyer Jay Neveloff, who represents Forest City, told the Real Deal in 2015, a project involving a Chinese firm "creates a huge market for…

Is Barclays Center dumping the Islanders, or are they renegotiating? Evidence varies (bond doc, cash receipts); NHL attendance biggest variable

The Internet has been abuzz since Bloomberg's Scott Soshnick reported 1/30/17, using an overly conclusory headline, that Brooklyn’s Barclays Center Is Dumping the Islanders.

That would end an unusual arrangement in which the arena agrees to pay the team a fixed sum (minus certain expenses), in exchange for keeping tickets, suite, and sponsorship revenue.

The arena would earn more without the hockey team, according to Bloomberg, which cited “a financial projection shared with potential investors showed the Islanders won’t contribute any revenue after the 2018-19 season--a clear signal that the team won’t play there, the people said."

That "signal," however, is hardly definitive, as are the media leaks about a prospective new arena in Queens, as shown in the screenshot below from Newsday. Both sides are surely pushing for advantage, if not bluffing.

Consider: the arena and the Islanders can't even formally begin their opt-out talks until after this season. The disc…

Skanska says it "expected to assemble a properly designed modular building, not engage in an iterative R&D experiment"

On 12/10/16, I noted that FastCo.Design's Prefab's Moment of Reckoning article dialed back the gush on the 461 Dean modular tower compared to the publication's previous coverage.

Still, I noted that the article relied on developer Forest City Ratner and architect SHoP to put the best possible spin on what was clearly a failure. From the article: At the project's outset, it took the factory (managed by Skanska at the time) two to three weeks to build a module. By the end, under FCRC's management, the builders cut that down to six days. "The project took a little longer than expected and cost a little bit more than expected because we started the project with the wrong contractor," [Forest City's Adam] Greene says.Skanska jabs back
Well, Forest City's estranged partner Skanska later weighed in--not sure whether they weren't asked or just missed a deadline--and their article was updated 12/13/16. Here's Skanska's statement, which shows th…

Not just logistics: bypassing Brooklyn for DNC 2016 also saved on optics (role of Russian oligarch, Shanghai government)

Surely the logistical challenges of holding a national presidential nominating convention in Brooklyn were the main (and stated) reasons for the Democratic National Committee's choice of Philadelphia.

And, as I wrote in NY Slant, the huge security cordon in Philadelphia would have been impossible in Brooklyn.

But consider also the optics. As I wrote in my 1/21/15 op-ed in the Times arguing that the choice of Brooklyn was a bad idea:
The arena also raises ethically sticky questions for the Democrats. While the Barclays Center is owned primarily by Forest City Ratner, 45 percent of it is owned by the Russian billionaire Mikhail D. Prokhorov (who also owns 80 percent of the Brooklyn Nets). Mr. Prokhorov has a necessarily cordial relationship with Russia’s president, Vladimir V. Putin — though he has been critical of Mr. Putin in the past, last year, at the Russian president’s request, he tried to transfer ownership of the Nets to one of his Moscow-based companies. An oligarch-owned a…