The Case of the Second Avenue Subway Performing Organization: the City College of New York, CUNY
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Load more
Recommended publications
-
WASHINGTON BRIDGE, Over the Harlem River from West 18Lst Street, Borough of Manhattan, to University Avenue, Borough of the Bronx
Landmarks Preservation Commission September 14, 1982, Designation List 159 LP-1222 WASHINGTON BRIDGE, over the Harlem River from West 18lst Street, Borough of Manhattan, to University Avenue, Borough of the Bronx. Built 1886-89; com petition designs by Charles C. Schneider and Wilhelm Hildenbrand modified by Union Bridge Company, William J. McAlpine, Theodore Cooper, and DeLemos & Cordes; chief engineer William R. Hutton; consulting architect Edward H. Kendall. Landmark Site: Manhattan Tax Map Block 2106, Lot 1 in part; Block 2149, Lot 525 in part, consisting of those parts of these ldta upon which the structure and approaches of the bridge rest. The Bronx Tax Map Block 2538, Lot 32 in part; Block 2880, Lots 1 & 250 both in part; Block 2884, Lots 2, 5 & 9 all in part, con sisting of those parts of these lots upon which the structure and approaches of the bridge rest. Boundaries: The Washington Bridge Landmark is encompassed by a line running southward parallel with the eastern curb line of Amsterdam Avenue; a line running eastward which is the extension of the southern curb line of West 181st Street to the point where it crosses Undercliff Avenue; a line running northward parallel with the eastern curb line of Undercliff Avenue; a line running westward from Undercliff Avenue which intersects with the extension of the northern curb lin~ of West 181st Street, to_t~~ point of beginning. On November 18, 1980, the Landmarks Preservation Commission held a public hearing on the proposed designation as a Landmark of the Washington Bridge and the pro posed designation of the related Landmark Site (Item No 8.). -
Chapter 1: Project Purpose and Need
Chapter 1: Project Purpose and Need A. INTRODUCTION This chapter presents the need for the proposed Manhattan East Side Transit Alternatives (MESA) project. Existing deficiencies in providing transit service on the East Side of Manhattan are summarized, based on the project’s Interim Report No. 1, Draft Inventory and Review of Current Operational and Service Issues (July 1996), and subsequent assessment of current and future conditions. The identification of problems has been a major factor in determining the project’s goals and objectives, also detailed below, which themselves form the basis for the evaluation of alternatives (see discussion in Chapter 2). This chapter also describes other major investment studies and planning programs that affect the proposed action and its goals, and dis- cusses the review and approval processes. B. PROJECT IDENTIFICATION/LOCATION The Federal Transit Administration (FTA) and the Metropolitan Transportation Authority (MTA), in cooperation with MTA New York City Transit Authority (NYCT),* are undertaking a Major Investment Study (MIS) to consider options for improving transit access and mobility on Manhattan’s East Side. As shown in Figure 1-1, the alternatives would provide service to an area including Lower Manhattan, the Lower East Side, East Midtown, the Upper East Side, and East Harlem. A secondary area, just west of the primary area south of 59th Street, has also been considered in this MIS. The primary project area contains a variety of land uses, encompassing the dense commercial districts of -
Chapter 3: Description of Construction Methods and Activities A. INTRODUCTION
Chapter 3: Description of Construction Methods and Activities A. INTRODUCTION This chapter describes the construction process for the Second Avenue Subway. Potential envi- ronmental impacts that could result from its construction, as well as mitigation measures to lessen their effects, are discussed in subsequent technical chapters. A preliminary sequencing plan for the proposed construction activities is also identified, although this plan could still change as engineering evolves and depending on the availability of funding. At this time, design of the Second Avenue Subway is still ongoing, and will continue to evolve over the next year. Consequently, this Final Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS) assesses the range of construction methods and activities that may be required, using a reasonable worst case approach throughout to describe potential impacts. In other words, where a variety of construction techniques could reasonably be used to build a particular project element, the method that would result in the worst overall impacts is the one that has been selected for analysis. The Second Avenue Subway would consist largely of twin tunnels with outside diameters of up to 23½ feet. (The tunnels described in the SDEIS would have had outside diameters of 21 feet.) Each tunnel would be approximately 8.5 miles long, running from East Harlem to Lower Manhattan. Sixteen new stations, numerous fan plants and ventilation cooling facilities, pumping stations, electrical power substations, new train storage yards, and various other elements would also be built. As described later in this chapter, where possible, construction would take place underground to minimize disruptions at the surface. Between approximately 92nd and 4th Streets (instead of 6th Street as described in the SDEIS), and again from Maiden Lane south, where Manhattan’s hard bedrock is relatively close to the surface, tunnels and stations would mostly be constructed underground in the rock, by one of several mining techniques. -
MTA Construction & Development, the Group Within the Agency Responsible for All Capital Construction Work
NYS Senate East Side Access/East River Tunnels Oversight Hearing May 7, 2021 Opening / Acknowledgements Good morning. My name is Janno Lieber, and I am the President of MTA Construction & Development, the group within the agency responsible for all capital construction work. I want to thank Chair Comrie and Chair Kennedy for the invitation to speak with you all about some of our key MTA infrastructure projects, especially those where we overlap with Amtrak. Mass transit is the lifeblood of New York, and we need a strong system to power our recovery from this unprecedented crisis. Under the leadership of Governor Cuomo, New York has demonstrated national leadership by investing in transformational mega-projects like Moynihan Station, Second Avenue Subway, East Side Access, Third Track, and most recently, Metro-North Penn Station Access, which we want to begin building this year. But there is much more to be done, and more investment is needed. We have a once-in-a-generation infrastructure opportunity with the new administration in Washington – and we thank President Biden, Secretary Buttigieg and Senate Majority Leader, Chuck Schumer, for their support. It’s a new day to advance transit projects that will turbo-charge the post-COVID economy and address overdue challenges of social equity and climate change. East Side Access Today we are on the cusp of a transformational upgrade to our commuter railroads due to several key projects. Top of the list is East Side Access. I’m pleased to report that it is on target for completion by the end of 2022 as planned. -
Lower Manhattan
WASHINGTON STREET IS 131/ CANAL STREETCanal Street M1 bus Chinatown M103 bus M YMCA M NQRW (weekday extension) HESTER STREET M20 bus Canal St Canal to W 147 St via to E 125 St via 103 20 Post Office 3 & Lexington Avs VESTRY STREET to W 63 St/Bway via Street 5 & Madison Avs 7 & 8 Avs VARICK STREET B= YORK ST AVENUE OF THE AMERICAS 6 only6 Canal Street Firehouse ACE LISPENARD STREET Canal Street D= LAIGHT STREET HOLLAND AT&T Building Chinatown JMZ CANAL STREET TUNNEL Most Precious EXIT Health Clinic Blood Church COLLISTER STREET CANAL STREET WEST STREET Beach NY Chinese B BEACH STStreet Baptist Church 51 Park WALKER STREET St Barbara Eldridge St Manhattan Express Bus Service Chinese Greek Orthodox Synagogue HUDSON STREET ®0= Merchants’ Fifth Police Church Precinct FORSYTH STREET 94 Association MOTT STREET First N œ0= to Lower Manhattan ERICSSON PolicePL Chinese BOWERY Confucius M Precinct ∑0= 140 Community Plaza Center 22 WHITE ST M HUBERT STREET M9 bus to M PIKE STREET X Grand Central Terminal to Chinatown84 Eastern States CHURCH STREET Buddhist Temple Union Square 9 15 BEACH STREET Franklin Civic of America 25 Furnace Center NY Chinatown M15 bus NORTH MOORE STREET WEST BROADWAY World Financial Center Synagogue BAXTER STREET Transfiguration Franklin Archive BROADWAY NY City Senior Center Kindergarten to E 126 St FINN Civil & BAYARD STREET Asian Arts School FRANKLIN PL Municipal via 1 & 2 Avs SQUARE STREET CENTRE Center X Street Courthouse Upper East Side to FRANKLIN STREET CORTLANDT ALLEY 1 Buddhist Temple PS 124 90 Criminal Kuan Yin World -
July 2016 Full Board Minutes
THE CITY OF NEW YORK MANHATTAN COMMUNITY BOARD 3 59 East 4th Street - New York, NY 10003 Phone (212) 533- 5300 - Fax (212) 533- 3659 www.cb3manhattan.org - [email protected] Jamie Rogers, Board Chair Susan Stetzer, District Manager July 2016 Full Board Minutes Meeting of Community Board 3 held on Tuesday, July 26, 2016 at 6:30pm at Cooper Union Rose Auditorium, 41 Cooper Square. Public Session: Robyn Shapiro, The Lowline: Reported that EDC announced conditional designation of the underground trolley terminal for use by The Lowline. Lowline launching young ambassadors program. Lowline is hiring a coordinator for the program. Application is online. Hope Provost, resident of 14th Street: supported CB3's Land Use committee decision to deny the variance request for 435 East 14th. Martha Adams Sullivan: Gouverneur Health Center, spoke on the services Gouverneur provides, upcoming events and the upgrades after its major renovation. 2nd Annual Open House Sat Nov 12. Mary Habstritt, Lilac Preservation Project: announced visit of historic ships to Pier 36 from Sept 9 – 19. Open to tour for free. Vaylateena Jones, LES Power Partnership: Asking CB3 to support literacy program DYCD Compass and DOE Universal 2nd Requesting 3rd Street Men's Shelter to come speak to CB3 Asking CB3 to support Health and Hospital Corp and Bellevue now before its too late. Adrienne Platch, resident of 14th Street: supported the Land Use Committee's decision to deny the variance at 435 East 14th Street. Urges the full board to do the same. Agnes Warnielista: supported the Land Use Committee's decision to deny the variance at 435 East 14th Street. -
MTA Metro-North Railroad Penn Station Access Project
Penn Station Access Project: Environmental Assessment and Section 4(f) Evaluation 1. Background and Purpose and Need 1.1 INTRODUCTION The Metropolitan Transportation Authority (MTA) is proposing the Penn Station Access (PSA) Project, which would provide one-seat passenger rail service to Penn Station New York (PSNY) on Manhattan’s west side for Metro North Railroad’s (Metro-North) New Haven Line (NHL) customers (Proposed Project). MTA Construction and Development (MTACD)—the successor to MTA Capital Construction—would plan, design, and construct the Proposed Project and related public outreach, and Metro-North would operate and maintain the service. The Proposed Project would provide new rail service from New Haven, Connecticut (CT) to PSNY in Manhattan by following Amtrak’s Hell Gate Line (HGL) on the Northeast Corridor (NEC) through the eastern Bronx and western Queens. The Proposed Project would make infrastructure improvements on the HGL beginning in southeastern Westchester County—where NHL trains would divert onto the HGL at Shell Interlocking1—and extending to Harold Interlocking in Queens, joining MTA Long Island Rail Road (LIRR) Main line. As part of the Proposed Project, four new Metro-North stations would be constructed in the eastern Bronx at Hunts Point, Parkchester-Van Nest, Morris Park, and Co-op City. Figure 1-1 depicts the Proposed Project’s construction area and service area, and shows the relationship between the HGL, Metro-North, and LIRR systems. The proposed Metro-North service to PSNY would begin operations after the LIRR East Side Access (ESA) project service to Grand Central Terminal (GCT) is initiated. The Amended Full Funding Grant Agreement (August 2016) between MTA and Federal Transit Administration (FTA) projects ESA service to begin December 2023. -
History and Aesthetics in Suspension Bridges
History and Aesthetics in Suspension Bridges 1 6-01 john a roebling_150dpi.jpg Today we trace the evolution of steel bridge design from its first American innovator, JA Roebling up through 1930’s New York In the 30’s in New York, despite hard economic times, many huge structures were erected 2 6-02 empire state building_150dpi.jpg The Empire State Building, tallest in the world About which more later 3 6-03 george washington bridge_150dpi.jpg The GW Bridge, longest suspension span by a factor of two, and 4 6-04 bayonne bridge_150dpi.jpg The Bayonne Bridge, longest arch span in the world, barely surpassing the Sydney Harbor Bridge 5 6-05 othmar ammann_150dpi.jpg These last two were both designed by Othmar H. Ammann, the greatest bridge artist to use steel as his material Ammann was born in Bern, graduated 1902 from ETH and 1904 to USA. Worked from 1912-23 for Lindenthal He would study under Karl Ritter protégé of Carl Cullmann The Swiss were uniquely able to mediate the scientific rigor of the germans with the design elegance of the French 6 6-06 hell gate and triborough bridges_150dpi.jpg The story of Ammann and the GWB begins with Gustav Lindenthal, the dean of American bridge engineers Ammann had cut his teeth as design assistant to Gustav Lindenthal at the Hellgate Bridge The last great bridge of the railroad bridges. From here on the great bridges would carry road traffic rather than trains Here we see two bridges, Hellgate and Triborough, on which Ammann would work, but not express his aesthetic vision 7 6-08 gustav lindenthal_150dpi.jpg Hellgate designer Lindnethal Born in Brunn in Austria, now Brno in the Czech Republic Designed a bridge at Pittsburgh, a lenticular truss to replace Roebling’s Smithfield St. -
21 Ncac 58A .0104 Agency Agreements and Disclosure
21 NCAC 58A .0104 AGENCY AGREEMENTS AND DISCLOSURE (a) Every agreement for brokerage services in a real estate transaction and every agreement for services connected with the management of a property owners association shall be in writing and signed by the parties thereto. Every agreement for brokerage services between a broker and an owner of the property to be the subject of a transaction shall be in writing and signed by the parties at the time of its formation. Every agreement for brokerage services between a broker and a buyer or tenant shall be express and shall be in writing and signed by the parties thereto not later than the time one of the parties makes an offer to purchase, sell, rent, lease, or exchange real estate to another. However, every agreement between a broker and a buyer or tenant that seeks to bind the buyer or tenant for a period of time or to restrict the buyer's or tenant's right to work with other agents or without an agent shall be in writing and signed by the parties thereto from its formation. A broker shall not continue to represent a buyer or tenant without a written, signed agreement when such agreement is required by this Rule. Every written agreement for brokerage services of any kind in a real estate transaction shall be for a definite period of time, shall include the broker's license number, and shall provide for its termination without prior notice at the expiration of that period, except that an agency agreement between a landlord and broker to procure tenants or receive rents for the landlord's property may allow for automatic renewal so long as the landlord may terminate with notice at the end of any contract period and any subsequent renewals. -
D. Rail Transit
Chapter 9: Transportation (Rail Transit) D. RAIL TRANSIT EXISTING CONDITIONS The subway lines in the study area are shown in Figures 9D-1 through 9D-5. As shown, most of the lines either serve only portions of the study area in the north-south direction or serve the study area in an east-west direction. Only one line, the Lexington Avenue line, serves the entire study area in the north-south direction. More importantly, subway service on the East Side of Manhattan is concentrated on Lexington Avenue and west of Allen Street, while most of the population on the East Side is concentrated east of Third Avenue. As a result, a large portion of the study area population is underserved by the current subway service. The following sections describe the study area's primary, secondary, and other subway service. SERVICE PROVIDED Primary Subway Service The Lexington Avenue line (Nos. 4, 5, and 6 routes) is the only rapid transit service that traverses the entire length of the East Side of Manhattan in the north-south direction. Within Manhattan, southbound service on the Nos. 4, 5 and 6 routes begins at 125th Street (fed from points in the Bronx). Local service on the southbound No. 6 route ends at the Brooklyn Bridge station and the last express stop within Manhattan on the Nos. 4 and 5 routes is at the Bowling Green station (service continues into Brooklyn). Nine of the 23 stations on the Lexington Avenue line within Manhattan are express stops. Five of these express stations also provide transfer opportunities to the other subway lines within the study area. -
An Economic Development Plan for the City of Ithaca a Program for Action
AN ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR THE CITY OF ITHACA A PROGRAM FOR ACTION Prepared for the City ofIthaca by: PLANNINGIENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH CONSULTANTS 31 0 West State Street Ithaca, NY 14850 With the assistance ofthe City ofIthaca Planning and Development staff September 1998 (Accepted by Common Council March 5, 2003) Economic Development Plan City ofIthaca, New York Alan J. Cohen - Mayor With special thanks to members ofthe Economic Development Plan Advisory Committee: David Sprague - Chairperson, Sprague & Janowsky, Ithaca, N.Y. I Martha Armstrong - Tompkins County Area Development, Ithaca, N.Y. Barbara Blanchard -Tompkins County Board ofRepresentatives, Ithaca, N.Y. I Susan Blumenthal- Common Council, City ofIthaca Scott Dagenais - M & T Bank, Ithaca, N.Y. I David Kay - Planning and Development Board, City ofIthaca Bill Myers - Alternatives Federal Credit Union, Ithaca, N.Y. I Tom Niederkorn -PlanninglEnvironmental Research Consultants, Ithaca, N.Y. John Novarr - Novarr-Mackesey Development Company, Ithaca, NY I Megan Shay - Evaporated Metals Films (EMF), Ithaca, N.Y. Martin Violette - Conservation Advisory Council, City ofIthaca _I Cal Walker - Assistant Director in the Learning Strategies Center, Ithaca, NY H. Matthys Van Cort - Director ofPlanning & Development, City ofIthaca I) Jeannie Lee - Economic Development Planner, City ofIthaca Consultant: I Tom Niederkorn -Planning/Environmental Research Consultants, Ithaca, N.Y. I Other Staff: Jennifer Kusznir - Economic Development Planner, City ofIthaca I Douglas McDonald - Director ofEconomic Development, City ofIthaca I I I I -I AN ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR THE CITY OF ITHACA A PROGRAM FOR ACTION TABLE OF CONTENTS Section 1. INTRODUCTION Part I 1 Part II 6 Section 2. IDGHLIGHTS 8 Section 3. CONDITIONS AND TRENDS 11 I Section 4. -
National Conference on Mass. Transit Crime and Vandali.Sm Compendium of Proceedings
If you have issues viewing or accessing this file contact us at NCJRS.gov. n co--~P7 National Conference on Mass. Transit Crime and Vandali.sm Compendium of Proceedings Conducted by T~he New York State Senate Committee on Transportation October 20-24, 1980 rtment SENATOR JOHN D. CAEMMERER, CHAIRMAN )ortation Honorable MacNeil Mitchell, Project Director i/lass )rtation ~tration ansportation ~t The National Conference on Mass Transit Crime and Vandalism and the publication of this Compendium of the Proceedings of the Conference were made possible by a grant from the United States Department of Transportation, Urban Mass Transportation Administration, Office of Transportation Management. Grateful acknowledgement is extended to Dr. Brian J. Cudahy and Mr. Marvin Futrell of that agency for their constructive services with respect to the funding of this grant. Gratitude is extended to the New York State Senate for assistance provided through the cooperation of the Honorable Warren M. Anderson, Senate Majority Leader; Dr. Roger C. Thompson, Secretary of the Senate; Dr. Stephen F. Sloan, Director of the Senate Research Service. Also our appreciation goes to Dr. Leonard M. Cutler, Senate Grants Officer and Liaison to the Steering Committee. Acknowledgement is made to the members of the Steering Committee and the Reso- lutions Committee, whose diligent efforts and assistance were most instrumental in making the Conference a success. Particular thanks and appreciation goes to Bert'J. Cunningham, Director of Public Affairs for the Senate Committee on Transportation, for his work in publicizing the Conference and preparing the photographic pages included in the Compendium. Special appreciation for the preparation of this document is extended to the Program Coordinators for the Conference, Carey S.