DOCSLIB.ORG

Report by the Chief Engineer Submitting For

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

RANS IT CON STRUCTI ON COMMI SSI O N ER A Report e by th Chief Engineer submitting fer ' Ceihpr ehensive Rapid Tr ansitPlan Cever ing all Bor oughsof the City of New Yor k Ti anlsil Coizstmaion C om mission er of August O ""I CE O"T RLANS IT CONST RUCTI ON COMMI SS I ONER oh n H: DW DAN " RNE R " , IEL “ TU . Chie f E n inz er I N T R O D U CT I O N For p rope r muni cipal growth and development wel l - cons i dered City pl ann ing i s N absolutely essent ial . o sati s factory C i ty pl an can be dev ised w ithout giving proper study to t rans it requi rement s and facil i ti es . I n f act , w i thout p roper and adequa te trans i t ser v ice no rmal mun ic ipal growth i s certain to be retarded an d abnormal and con gested cond it ions develop in certain metropol i tan dist r icts and strangulation o f grow th resul ts i n neglected areas . The T ran si t Construct ion Com m iss ioner , real iz ing the necess i ty o f an orderly development o f rapi d trans i t l ines i n al l sect ion s o f the C i ty , author ized Ch ie f Engineer t Dan iel L . Turner o study an d formul ate a pl an representing h is concept ion o f the 29th problem and its sol ution . The repo rt was presented July and was ordered p r inted fiicial its c for d istr ibution w ithout o act ion be ing taken upon re om mendations . The purpose o f publ icat ion i s to evoke suggest ion an d cr it ici s m . I t shoul d be borne i n m in d that i t i s not contemp lated that the comprehens ive trans it s cheme in its enti rety should n be undertaken at once but that i t shoul d be proceeded w ith gradual ly a d continuously . " ‘ O V C z WS B o x 7 8 P R O P O S E D C O MP R E H E N S I V E R A P I D T R A N S I T P L A N C O V E R I N G A L L O "T HE B O R O U GH S O "N E WY O R K C I T Y H L A Y The Honorable "O N H . D E N E , Comm issione r . Dear S ir I subm it he rew ith a report , togethe r w ith a map , w ith respect to a P roposed Com o f prehens ive Rapid Trans it Pl an cover ing al l the Boroughs o f New York C ity . I t has been recognized s ince the ‘ incept ion o f the fi rs t subway that the publ ic author it ies charged w ith the responsibil ity there fo r shoul d prov ide the necessary pl an s so n tha t the const ructi on o f rapi d trans i t l i nes m igh t g o o con t i n uou sly , in o rder th at the trans i t fac i l it ies m ight keep pace w i th the enormous t raff ic g row th in the C ity . Con fo rm ing to th is pol icy , recommen dat ions w i th pl ans were subm i tted to the predecessor s f o the Transi t Construct ion Comm issioner , the Board o f Rapi d T ransi t Rai l road Com its m iss ioners , and successo r , the Publ i c Serv ice Commi ss ion , wh ich formed the basi s fo r the l ines included in the D ual System contracts . S ince the D ual System cont racts have been under const ruct ion , the attent ion o f the Publ ic Serv ice Commission and o f the T ransi t Const ruction Commi ss ioner necessar ily has been devoted al most enti rely to the compl et ion o f these contracts . B ut i t has been recognized that a new transit p rogram was imperatively necessary . There fore , in the F 1 91 9 al l o f , wh ich was as early as the c i rcum stances perm itted , I undertook to formulate a com prehens ive t ransi t plan . The resul t o f these stud ies I am now sub mi tting . The t ime has now arr ive d when we must look ahead again and p rov ide plans fo r and begin the work o f const ruct ion on the enl argement o f the rapi d t ransit system . I t has probably averaged ten years f rom the inception o f prev ious general t ransi t f proj ects to the date o the beginning o f ope rat ion . I t i s there fore important to begin the new pl ans at once . In consi der ing routes that are to be recommende d fo r earl y construct ion i t is desi rable that the program deal w ith the transi t requi rements for the 2 next 5 years . There fore , in my analysi s o f the situat ion I have undertaken to ind icate the new fac il ities wh ich in my j udgment shoul d be incl uded in such a 25 -year bu il d ing program . They are as fol lows Extensions Extension o f the Corona b ranch o f the Steinway Tunnel l ine f rom its present terminus to M ain Street , Flushing . Extens ion o f the Steinway Tunn el l ine f rom its proposed terminus at Seventh Avenue and 4l st S t reet west th rough 4 l st St reet to a connect ion w ith the propo sed - A msterdam Avenue E ighth Avenue t runk l ine . Tw o - track extens ion o f the New York M unicipal Rail way Corporation B roadway Fourth Avenue l ine f rom 59th St reet and Seventh Avenue up Central Park West and Eighth or Seventh Avenue to the Harlem R iver . Extension o f the N ew York M un icipal Rail way Corpo rat ion B roadway - Fourth Avenue l ine f rom a connect ion at B roadway and C i ty Hal l Park , v ia Ann St reet and t the East R i ver o B rooklyn , and v i a B rooklyn B r i dge term inal prope rty, Washington D Kal St reet , Li v ingston St reet , e b A venue and Fort Greene Place to a connection with the Ful ton Street elevated l ine at or near Ashlan d Place . Extension o f the N ew York Mun icipal Railway Corporat ion Fou rth A venue Sub - way , B rooklyn , by way o f a two track tunnel under the Narrows to the Borough o f Richmond . Extension o f the Nostran d A venue Subway o f the Interborough Company south into an d th rough Coney I sl and . Extension o f the A stor ia branch o f the Steinway Tunnel l ine south th rough Queens and B rooklyn to a connect ion w i th the B righton B each l ine i n B rooklyn , thereby p rovi d ing a B rooklyn c rosstown l i ne . Ex ten sion o f the two tracks o f the Inte rborough Seventh A venue - B roadway l ine no w ter m inat ing at the B attery f rom a point at Greenw ich an d Liberty St reets v ia n k Li be rty S treet , Ma iden La e and the E ast R iver to B rooklyn , and thence v ia H ic s Street , an d Un ion Street , Seventh A venue Gravesend A venue to a connect ion w ith the Cul ver no w N 4 l ine incl uded under Con tract O . I n add i t ion to the foregoing exten sions , a number o f m inor extensions to the elevated f l ines shoul d be const ructed where such l ines now term inate short o the C ity l im i ts . N ew Tr un k L in es A new w est si de M an hattan t runk l ine cons isting o f fou r t racks o f the p roposed 8- - 1 track A ms terdam A venue E ight h Avenue trunk l ine , extend ing f rom 55th Street in u pper M anhattan to 23 d Stree t i n lower M anhattan "w i th a col l ecting and d istr ibut ing branch extend ing f rom i ts northern extrem ity th rough upper M anhattan and into The ' B ronx , v ia For t Wash ington A venue to Spuyten Duyvi l , and thence v i a Netherland A venu e t h rough th e R iver dal e sect ion "w i th p rov i s ion at 1 5 5 th S treet fo r a future east erl y branch into an d ac ross The B ronx"w i th a branch f rom its so uthern extrem i ty 2 exten d ing east through 3d Street to the East R ive r , w h ich subsequently can be carr ied i nto an d ac ross B rooklyn , an d w i th another branch exten ding south down H udson w and Streets to some here near the B attery , wh ich subsequen tl y can al so be ex ten ded to B rooklyn .
Recommended publications
  • A Retrospective of Preservation Practice and the New York City Subway System

    A Retrospective of Preservation Practice and the New York City Subway System

    Under the Big Apple: a Retrospective of Preservation Practice and the New York City Subway System by Emma Marie Waterloo This thesis/dissertation document has been electronically approved by the following individuals: Tomlan,Michael Andrew (Chairperson) Chusid,Jeffrey M. (Minor Member) UNDER THE BIG APPLE: A RETROSPECTIVE OF PRESERVATION PRACTICE AND THE NEW YORK CITY SUBWAY SYSTEM A Thesis Presented to the Faculty of the Graduate School of Cornell University In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Master of Arts by Emma Marie Waterloo August 2010 © 2010 Emma Marie Waterloo ABSTRACT The New York City Subway system is one of the most iconic, most extensive, and most influential train networks in America. In operation for over 100 years, this engineering marvel dictated development patterns in upper Manhattan, Brooklyn, and the Bronx. The interior station designs of the different lines chronicle the changing architectural fashion of the aboveground world from the turn of the century through the 1940s. Many prominent architects have designed the stations over the years, including the earliest stations by Heins and LaFarge. However, the conversation about preservation surrounding the historic resource has only begun in earnest in the past twenty years. It is the system’s very heritage that creates its preservation controversies. After World War II, the rapid transit system suffered from several decades of neglect and deferred maintenance as ridership fell and violent crime rose. At the height of the subway’s degradation in 1979, the decision to celebrate the seventy-fifth anniversary of the opening of the subway with a local landmark designation was unusual.
  • April 2011 Bulletin.Pub

    April 2011 Bulletin.Pub

    TheNEW YORK DIVISION BULLETIN - APRIL, 2011 Bulletin New York Division, Electric Railroaders’ Association Vol. 54, No. 4 April, 2011 The Bulletin IRT ADOPTED LABOR-SAVING DEVICES Published by the New 90 YEARS AGO York Division, Electric Railroaders’ Association, In the January, 2011 issue, we explained required about 1,000 turnstiles. Incorporated, PO Box 3001, New York, New how IRT avoided bankruptcy by reducing In 1921, IRT and BRT were experimenting York 10008-3001. dividends and payments to subsidiaries. In with various types of door control by which this issue, we will explain how the company one Guard could operate and close several perfected labor-saving devices. doors in a train simultaneously. This type of For general inquiries, About 1920, the Transit Commission was electrical door control has allowed the use of contact us at nydiv@ erausa.org or by phone investigating the advantages of installing automatic devices to prevent doors from at (212) 986-4482 (voice turnstiles in IRT’s subway stations. This in- closing and injuring passengers who would mail available). The stallation could reduce operating expenses have been injured by hand-operated doors. Division’s website is and improve efficiency of operation. Since The experiments established additional www.erausa.org/ the subway was opened in 1904, the com- safety. Movement of the train was prevented nydiv.html. pany used tickets at each station and can- until all doors were closed. These experi- Editorial Staff: celled these tickets by having passengers ments in multiple door control, which were Editor-in-Chief: place them in a manually operated chopping continuing, resulted in refinements and im- Bernard Linder box.
  • August 2015 ERA Bulletin.Pub

    August 2015 ERA Bulletin.Pub

    The ERA BULLETIN - AUGUST, 2015 Bulletin Electric Railroaders’ Association, Incorporated Vol. 58, No. 8 August, 2015 The Bulletin TWO ANNIVERSARIES — Published by the Electric SEA BEACH AND STEINWAY TUNNEL Railroaders’ Association, Incorporated, PO Box The first Brooklyn Rapid Transit (BRT) was incorporated on August 29, 1896. 3323, New York, New steel cars started operating in revenue ser- BRT acquired the company’s stock on or York 10163-3323. N about November 5, 1897. The line was elec- vice on the Sea Beach Line (now ) and the new Fourth Avenue Subway one hundred trified with overhead trolley wire at an un- For general inquiries, years ago, June 22, 1915. Revenue opera- known date. contact us at bulletin@ tion began at noon with trains departing from A March 1, 1907 agreement allowed the erausa.org . ERA’s Chambers Street and Coney Island at the company to operate through service from the website is th www.erausa.org . same time. Two– and three-car trains were Coney Island terminal to 38 Street and New routed via Fourth Avenue local tracks and Utrecht Avenue. Starting 1908 or earlier, nd Editorial Staff: southerly Manhattan Bridge tracks. trains operate via the Sea Beach Line to 62 Editor-in-Chief : On March 31, 1915, Interborough Rapid Street and New Utrecht Avenue, the West Bernard Linder End (now D) Line, and the Fifth Avenue “L.” Tri-State News and Transit, Brooklyn Rapid Transit, and Public Commuter Rail Editor : Service Commission officials attended BRT’s Sea Beach cars were coupled to West End Ronald Yee exhibit of the new B-Type cars, nicknamed or Culver cars.
  • COMPETITIVE PUBLIC CONTRACTS Eric M. Singer INTRODUCTION

    COMPETITIVE PUBLIC CONTRACTS Eric M. Singer INTRODUCTION

    COPYRIGHT © 2016, VIRGINIA LAW REVIEW ASSOCIATION COMPETITIVE PUBLIC CONTRACTS Eric M. Singer* INTRODUCTION .................................................................................... 1298 I. THE GOVERNMENT’S CONTRACT-REMEDIES PROBLEM ................. 1305 A. Background ............................................................................ 1305 B. The Problem with Money Damages ....................................... 1310 C. The Problem with Vendor Screening and Oversight ............. 1314 D. The Problem with Relational Contracts. ............................... 1319 II. COMPETITIVE DUAL SOURCING AS CONTRACT ENFORCEMENT ..... 1322 A. Competitive Dual Sourcing Explained .................................. 1322 B. Variations .............................................................................. 1326 1. Geographic Division ....................................................... 1326 2. Operational Division: New York Subway ....................... 1328 3. Division by Competition: First Transcontinental Railroad ........................................................................... 1330 4. Temporal Division ........................................................... 1332 5. Substitution ...................................................................... 1335 6. Variations in Shifting Mechanisms.................................. 1336 C. Competitive Dual Sourcing versus Performance Bonds ....... 1338 III. IMPLEMENTING COMPETITIVE DUAL SOURCING ............................ 1342 A. Agent Incentives ....................................................................
  • The Backbone of the Metropolis How the Development of Rapid Transit Determined the Becoming of the New York City Metropolis

    The Backbone of the Metropolis How the Development of Rapid Transit Determined the Becoming of the New York City Metropolis

    The Backbone of the Metropolis How the development of rapid transit determined the becoming of the New York City Metropolis. History Thesis By: Pieter Schreurs Student number: 1090526 Email: [email protected] Telephone: 31(0)6-21256096 Tutor: Prof.Dr. Franziska Bollerey Date: July 2008 Cover image: “The Subway”, by George Tooker 1950, Egg tempera on composition board, Collection of Whitney Museum of American Art Source: “Subway City; Riding the trains, reading New York”; Brooks, 1997 The Backbone of the Metropolis How the development of rapid transit determined the becoming of the New York City Metropolis. History Thesis By: Pieter Schreurs Student number: 1090526 Email: [email protected] Telephone: 31(0)6-21256096 Tutor: Prof.Dr. Franziska Bollerey Date: July 2008 Image 1: The Network of Parkways. In the 1920s and 30s Robert Moses developed and intricate network of park ways around New York City. These were designed for the Joy of driving. Source: “The Power Broker”; Caro, 1975 4 Introduction Grade separated urban rapid transit and the metropolis: knowledge of what is in between this location and the previous one. users underground and re-emerge them to completely different parts of the city, without According to James Crawford, “…Transport technology has always affected both the growth and form of cities, and each new transport mode has left its stamp on urban form. When a New York, New York: new model is adopted, existing urban areas are forced into new uses and ever new forms and new development is arranged in accordance with the demands and capabilities of the In researching the development of rapid transit systems in relation to the development new mode...“ (Crawford, 2000, p.
  • The New York City Subway

    The New York City Subway

    John Stern, a consultant on the faculty of the not-for-profit Aesthetic Realism Foundation in New York City, and a graduate of Columbia University, has had a lifelong interest in architecture, history, geology, cities, and transportation. He was a senior planner for the Tri-State Regional Planning Commission in New York, and is an Honorary Director of the Shore Line Trolley Museum in Connecticut. His extensive photographs of streetcar systems in dozens of American and Canadian cities during the late 1940s, '50s, and '60s comprise a major portion of the Sprague Library's collection. Mr. Stern resides in New York City with his wife, Faith, who is also a consultant of Aesthetic Realism, the education founded by the American poet and critic Eli Siegel (1902-1978). His public talks include seminars on Fiorello LaGuardia and Robert Moses, and "The Brooklyn Bridge: A Study in Greatness," written with consultant and art historian Carrie Wilson, which was presented at the bridge's 120th anniversary celebration in 2003, and the 125th anniversary in 2008. The paper printed here was given at the Aesthetic Realism Foundation, 141 Greene Street in NYC on October 23rd and at the Queens Public Library in Flushing in 2006. The New York Subway: A Century By John Stern THURSDAY, OCTOBER 27, 1904 was a gala day in the City of New York. Six hundred guests assembled inside flag-bedecked City Hall listened to speeches extolling the brand-new subway, New York's first. After the last speech, Mayor George B. McClellan spoke, saying, "Now I, as Mayor, in the name of the people, declare the subway open."1 He and other dignitaries proceeded down into City Hall station for the inau- gural ride up the East Side to Grand Central Terminal, then across 42nd Street to Times Square, and up Broadway to West 145th Street: 9 miles in all (shown by the red lines on the map).
  • UK Employment Arrangements

    UK Employment Arrangements

    4 April 2014 UK Employment Arrangements UK Revises Proposed Tax Measures Against Dual Contracts SUMMARY The UK government has published this year’s Finance Bill, which contains revised draft legislation to “end the abuse of dual contracts”. Dual contracts have in particular been used by employees resident, but not domiciled, in the United Kingdom to benefit from the UK’s remittance basis of taxation for their income from overseas duties, while also working in the UK for a related employer. Under the proposals, where: the employee holds separate employments inside and outside the UK; the employers are the same or “associated” with each other; the UK employment and the relevant employment are “related”; and the credit that the UK would allow for foreign tax on the income is less than 65% of the UK’s top rate of tax for employment income (currently 45%), the employee will be taxed as the income arises, not when it is remitted to the UK. Following consultation, the government has narrowed the proposals: the rules will not catch employments held separately for regulatory reasons; they will not catch employees simply because they are directors unless they are also significant shareholders; the threshold in the comparative tax rate test has been reduced slightly, from 75% to 65% of the top rate of income tax; and the PAYE rules will not apply to income caught by the new measure: employees will account for tax on it through the self-assessment tax return process. The new rules would apply from 6 April 2014 onwards. New York Washington, D.C.
  • Types and Costs of Services for Dual Beneficiaries by Medicare Advantage Health Plans

    Types and Costs of Services for Dual Beneficiaries by Medicare Advantage Health Plans

    Research Report Types and Costs of Services for Dual Beneficiaries by Medicare Advantage Health Plans An Environmental Scan Melony E. Sorbero, Susan L. Lovejoy, Ryan Kandrack, Erin Audrey Taylor, Kathryn E. Bouskill C O R P O R A T I O N For more information on this publication, visit www.rand.org/t/RR2213 Published by the RAND Corporation, Santa Monica, Calif. © Copyright 2018 RAND Corporation R® is a registered trademark. Limited Print and Electronic Distribution Rights This document and trademark(s) contained herein are protected by law. This representation of RAND intellectual property is provided for noncommercial use only. Unauthorized posting of this publication online is prohibited. Permission is given to duplicate this document for personal use only, as long as it is unaltered and complete. Permission is required from RAND to reproduce, or reuse in another form, any of its research documents for commercial use. For information on reprint and linking permissions, please visit www.rand.org/pubs/permissions. The RAND Corporation is a research organization that develops solutions to public policy challenges to help make communities throughout the world safer and more secure, healthier and more prosperous. RAND is nonprofit, nonpartisan, and committed to the public interest. RAND’s publications do not necessarily reflect the opinions of its research clients and sponsors. www.rand.org Preface This qualitative study sought to identify the types of services that Medicare Advantage plans implement to meet the needs of dually enrolled and other high-cost, high-need beneficiaries, as well as the types of resources needed to implement these services.
  • The City of New York Office of the Mayor New York, Ny 10007

    The City of New York Office of the Mayor New York, Ny 10007

    THE CITY OF NEW YORK OFFICE OF THE MAYOR NEW YORK, NY 10007 THE US HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES COMMITTEE ON SPACE, SCIENCE, & TECHNOLOGY SUBCOMMITTEE ON INVESTIGATIONS AND OVERSIGHT Testimony of Susanne DesRoches, Deputy Director for Infrastructure and Energy, New York City Mayor’s Office of Resiliency. Tuesday, May 21, 2019 I. INTRODUCTION Good morning. My name is Susanne DesRoches and I am the Deputy Director for Infrastructure and Energy for the New York City Mayor’s Office of Resiliency. On behalf of the Mayor and the City of New York, I would like to thank Chair Sherrill and Ranking Member Norman for the opportunity to speak today about the City’s challenges, accomplishments, and opportunities to build a more resilient transportation network that will benefit New Yorkers and the nation’s economy as a whole. Nearly seven years ago, Hurricane Sandy hit New York City with unprecedented force, tragically killing 44 New Yorkers,1 and causing over $19 billion in damages and lost economic activity. Neighborhoods were devastated: 88,700 buildings were flooded; 23,400 businesses were impacted; and our region’s infrastructure was seriously disrupted.2 Over 2,000,000 residents were without power for weeks and fuel shortages persisted for over a month.3 Cross river subway and rail tunnels vital to the movement of people and goods were closed for days. Our airports were closed to passenger and freight traffic, and our ports sustained substantial damage to physical infrastructure as well as goods stored at their facilities. In short, Sandy highlighted New York City’s vulnerability to climate change and rising seas and underscores the urgency of the actions we’ve taken since then to build a stronger, more resilient city.
  • Queens East River & North Shore Greenway Master Plan

    Queens East River & North Shore Greenway Master Plan

    Queens East River & North Shore Greenway Master Plan NYC Department of City Planning • 2006 Queens East River & North Shore Greenway Master Plan Queens East River and North Shore Greenway Master Plan New York City Department of City Planning New York City Department of Parks & Recreation 2006 2006 • NYC Department of Parks & Recreation Queens East River & North Shore Greenway Master Plan Project PIN X500.97 The preparation of this report was fi nanced in part through funds from the U.S.Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration. This document is disseminated under the sponsorship of the U.S. Department of Transportation in the interest of information exchange. The contents of this report refl ect the views of the author, who is responsible for the facts and accuracy of the data presented within. The contents do not necessarily refl ect the offi cial views or policies of the Federal Highway Administration. This report does not constitute a standard, specifi cation, or regulation. NYC Department of City Planning • 2006 Queens East River & North Shore Greenway Master Plan Table of Contents Introduction ............................................................................................................................................................................................................1 Project Description ................................................................................................................................................................................................ 1 Study Area
  • Rail Transit Capacity

    Rail Transit Capacity

    7UDQVLW&DSDFLW\DQG4XDOLW\RI6HUYLFH0DQXDO PART 3 RAIL TRANSIT CAPACITY CONTENTS 1. RAIL CAPACITY BASICS ..................................................................................... 3-1 Introduction................................................................................................................. 3-1 Grouping ..................................................................................................................... 3-1 The Basics................................................................................................................... 3-2 Design versus Achievable Capacity ............................................................................ 3-3 Service Headway..................................................................................................... 3-4 Line Capacity .......................................................................................................... 3-5 Train Control Throughput....................................................................................... 3-5 Commuter Rail Throughput .................................................................................... 3-6 Station Dwells ......................................................................................................... 3-6 Train/Car Capacity...................................................................................................... 3-7 Introduction............................................................................................................. 3-7 Car Capacity...........................................................................................................
  • Re)New Your City, New York City: Transporting Transformation Hubs

    Re)New Your City, New York City: Transporting Transformation Hubs

    (Re)New Your City, New York City: Transporting Transformation Hubs A Senior Honors Thesis submitted by Rayn Riel In partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Bachelor of Arts In Interdisciplinary Studies (International Urban Development) Tufts University August 2015 Advisor: Professor Weiping Wu, Department of Urban and Environmental Policy and Planning Reader: Professor Daniel Abramson, Department of Art and Art History i| (RE)New Your City, New York City ABSTRACT: New York’s Metropolitan Transportation Authority (MTA) is constantly running trains, but it is also constantly running a deficit. Unlike profitable transportation companies, such as the Hong Kong Mass Transit Railway (MTR), the MTA has few valuable real estate assets which could be adequately transformed into transit-oriented and transit-owned joint development hubs. Similar to other U.S. public transportation agencies, space for pragmatic and profitable commercial activities – including shops and offices operating on agency-owned land – is limited to a few select stations, yards, concourses, and passageways, because most profitable assets from private predecessors were sold decades ago. However, while the MTA’s ability to remain revenue-positive or self-sufficient through real estate development is stymied, the MTA has been capitalizing upon its few existing assets for additional revenue. This process, however, in coordination with the City of New York in order to develop value capture mechanisms, is lengthy and cumbersome. The MTA has not developed the resources needed to develop property. This Senior Honors Thesis elucidates how the MTA can overcome organizational barriers in order to contextually ‘transport’ the MTA’s limited portfolio of assets into ‘transformation hubs’, and in order to do so, advocate for a privatized, profitable, and independent real estate development division of the MTA, chartered for real estate development.