NEW YORK | Second Avenue Subway

[ChargerCarl]

lol 15 billion for a subway...

[Crawford]

Originally Posted by ChargerCarl

lol 15 billion for a subway...

That's just two additional phases. That isn't even full completion for Manhattan.

Then there's a proposed Bronx extension for the SAS. So what are we talking in total? $30 billion or something? That's completely insane, even if the project is desperately needed. Are they gonna extend it southwards too, into Brooklyn? Make it an even $50 billion or something? Ridiculous.

Imagine if they had to build the NYC subway from scratch today. It would probably cost a couple trillion.

[ChargerCarl]

lol I'm fairly certain other cities have built entire systems for cheaper than the 2nd ave. subway

What a fucking joke this country is. We deserve Trump.

[plutonicpanda]

Originally Posted by ChargerCarl

lol I'm fairly certain other cities have built entire systems for cheaper than the 2nd ave. subway

What a fucking joke this country is. We deserve Trump.

Yeah, why exactly is that? Lower standards? No environmental impact reports or not as strong? Weaker labor unions? Please explain.

[SFBruin]

I think it's just cost of labor. Workers in America simply cost more than workers in other places/workers in America pre-WWII. There may be some element of administrative costs, but I think the majority of the costs for these projects are labor costs.

It would be nice if someone can verify this.

[ChargerCarl]

Originally Posted by plutonicpanda

Yeah, why exactly is that? Lower standards? No environmental impact reports or not as strong? Weaker labor unions? Please explain.

No one really knows. Probably just terrible project management. It doesn't seem to be one thing.

Originally Posted by SFBruin

I think it's just cost of labor. Workers in America simply cost more than workers in other places/workers in America pre-WWII. There may be some element of administrative costs, but I think the majority of the costs for these projects are labor costs.

It would be nice if someone can verify this.

It's not labor costs. Other countries have high wages and strong unions yet keep their costs contained. It's an administrative and planning issue.

[a very long weekend]

several issues:

1) labor costs are pretty much tied with europeans, but not because of wages. they have much more streamlined healthcare and retirement systems, so we pay more on that end for having union labor;
2) almost nowhere do we have in-house engineering, so outside consultants do the work for a much higher cost than in europe;
3) europe (and asia) are much more centralized, they have a capital and that's their main focus, but also they mostly have unitary governments that make decisions from on high, even outside of the capital. in america, we don't have that, we have cities, states and a federal government that is half the time out to lunch. also, a huge challenge is that the productive regions - that want the infrastructure - pay taxes and those are sucked off to the unproductive regions in the center and south. politically, people in those areas must be paid off to get money back to the coastal cities - "buy american" is a great example of this;
4) still on politics, we have many overlapping agencies responsible for reviews of all kinds (enviro, technical, etc) and overlapping agencies that must sign off to fund. in NYC, you'd have 6-7 city agencies, mta, multiple state agencies, the mostly-autonomous port authority and then the various federal programs that review and fund;
5) NIMBYs. it's far too easy here to jam up the works with lawsuits on any number of causes of action. court costs and, worse, overplanning in anticipation of lawsuits (design, insurance, the works) is something most countries need not deal with;
6) democratic failings and a people that must be "impressed." people of any means are just not willing to ride public transit unless it's nice. and nice costs a lot more than merely serviceable, like most places do;
7) bizarre and unique specs and regulations that mean we can't just take off the shelf product and plug it in; and lastly and relatedly,
8) we don't build all that much, so we don't have a giant number of competing bidders with shops champing at the bit. a bombardier or siemens factory here or there is nothing compared to a full blown industry. they can't influence the government to change reqs or specs, they don't bring down costs.

we never get any deals, because everyone has to set up shop here, and design to our nutso old school standards. that's after dozens of agencies have agreed on all sorts of plans over many years of planning, all lawsuits have been settled (and insured against and planned around), and funding has been figured out. and then guess who builds?

[C.]

Originally Posted by plutonicpanda

Yeah, why exactly is that? Lower standards? No environmental impact reports or not as strong? Weaker labor unions? Please explain.

To be completely honest, the current environmental review process is ridiculously long and expensive. It needs to be modernized. More paper is wasted along with more opportunities for NIMBYism to halt a project with little or no actual protection for the environment when all is said and done, especially for an urban transportation project that's built entirely underground. It's not like these things are being built in the woods or next to a national park.

Prevailing wage requirements add anywhere from 20% to 30% to the overall construction costs. That's not a bad thing if you believe construction workers should be paid a livable wage. I would say this streamline the requirements so money goes to the actual workers and not for swarms of compliance staff that are currently needed under existing laws.

[C.]

Originally Posted by ChargerCarl

It's not labor costs. Other countries have high wages and strong unions yet keep their costs contained. It's an administrative and planning issue.

Bingo!

[ChargerCarl]

While we don't know the actual cost breakdowns, to the extent it could be labor costs it would be because our local governments are captured by union interests and striking a bad deal for taxpayers, not because the US is a rich country with high wages. So thats what I mean when I say its an administration issue.

Of course I think it has more to do with design decisions and bad planning. As long weekend pointed out above, US transit agencies are starved for talent and have to hire an army of consultants to check all their work, and these people don't always have the bottom line of the agency in mind.

[mrnyc]

if anything primarily its regs and overlapping agencies and fiefdoms that other countries do not have to deal with as much. i could see in-house talent helping the situation too if we were in a constantly designing and building mode, which we should be. not to get too political, but this is an area that trump, a real estate guy, could potentially do something positive about. we can only press the issues and hope.

[ChargerCarl]

Yeah I'm sure thats a huge issue too. Unlike NYC, Los Angeles' metro doesn't have to deal with any "competing" transit agencies overlapping its service area and consequently has far lower subway construction costs than NY.

But LA still has high costs relative to the rest of the world. They're just on the order of 2-3x more expensive instead of like 10x.

And I put "competing" in parenthesis because its absolutely ridiculous that the New York metro region's transit agencies can't play nice with each other even though they off the same public, complementary service.

[scalziand]

Originally Posted by CIA

Rumor that funding $15 billion for Second Avenue Subway phases I & II will be part of Trump's infrastructure bill push.

Here's the list:
https://assets.documentcloud.org/doc...-1-Reduced.txt

18. Second Avenue Subway - Phases 2 & 3
1. Description: The Second Avenue Subway will
be New York City’s first major expansion of the
subway system in over 50 years. When fully
completed (see phases at right), the line will
stretch 8.5 miles along the length of Manhattan's
East Side, from 125th Street in Harlem to Hanover
Square in Lower Manhattan.
2. Authority: New York Metropolitan Transit
Authority (MTA)
3. Cost: $14.2 billion
4. Jobs: 16,000 direct jobs
5. Status
5.1.

Engineering - done

5.2.

Permitting - 95%

5.3.

Funding - public/seeking federal

[Crawford]

Ah, only 14.2 billion for the next two phases (which would only add 8 additional stations). What a deal!

On a happier note, I never knew that Phase 3 and 4 of SAS would be partially four-tracks, which should be great for congestion, express routing and storage. The whole line should be four-tracks, like most of the system, but whatever; if they did it entirely four-tracks that would probably double costs.

[mrnyc]

Originally Posted by ChargerCarl

Yeah I'm sure thats a huge issue too. Unlike NYC, Los Angeles' metro doesn't have to deal with any "competing" transit agencies overlapping its service area and consequently has far lower subway construction costs than NY.

But LA still has high costs relative to the rest of the world. They're just on the order of 2-3x more expensive instead of like 10x.

And I put "competing" in parenthesis because its absolutely ridiculous that the New York metro region's transit agencies can't play nice with each other even though they off the same public, complementary service.

yes, and its not just multiple transit agencies not playing nice, but the fact that the metro spans across other states seriously complicates matters in nyc for all kinds of issues that los angeles/sf doesnt have. just imagine what kind of planning could be done and what kind of pot of $ would be more readily available if the nyc metro, including parts of nj and ct and whatever else, were more like los angeles and under gov oversight of one mega nyc citystate metro transit agency? or even if nyc metro was in only one state? or something like that? borders are borders, but they do complicate life!

so certainly high labor costs in the northeast is part of the mix of troublesomeness, but its not the primary issue by any means.

[mrsmartman]

Liberal ideology is incompatible with the continuous pursuit of upward mobility.

Al Smith, La Guardia and Robert Moses would probably agree that we have gone too far in creating a welfare state hostile to business development.



Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/96th_S...Avenue_Subway)

[H-man]

^ lol

[mrnyc]

trump to build second avenue phase two and three?


Second Avenue Subway may be one of Trump’s infrastructure priority projects

Leaked documents offer insight into the air, rail, and road projects that may get funding
BY AMY PLITT@CURBEDNY JAN 25, 2017, 10:46AM EST


Early estimates for the second phase of the Second Avenue Subway, running from 96th to 125th Streets, are around $6 billion, and the MTA has yet to finalize anything as far as planning and construction goes. Given the MTA’s history of budget overruns, it’s possible that the number could rise. A plan has yet to be put forth for phase three.


more:
http://ny.curbed.com/2017/1/25/14382...administration

[ChargerCarl]

Originally Posted by mrnyc

yes, and its not just multiple transit agencies not playing nice, but the fact that the metro spans across other states seriously complicates matters in nyc for all kinds of issues that los angeles/sf doesnt have. just imagine what kind of planning could be done and what kind of pot of $ would be more readily available if the nyc metro, including parts of nj and ct and whatever else, were more like los angeles and under gov oversight of one mega nyc citystate metro transit agency? or even if nyc metro was in only one state? or something like that? borders are borders, but they do complicate life!

so certainly high labor costs in the northeast is part of the mix of troublesomeness, but its not the primary issue by any means.

Honestly I think they should consider privatizing the regions rail service. Not that your solution couldn't work, I just don't have faith in American political institutions to successfully pull it off, and I think ridership is high enough to where it could be profitable.

[mrnyc]

Originally Posted by ChargerCarl

Honestly I think they should consider privatizing the regions rail service. Not that your solution couldn't work, I just don't have faith in American political institutions to successfully pull it off, and I think ridership is high enough to where it could be profitable.

something about that very topic:

https://www.law360.com/articles/7493...rail-in-the-us