BY JOSEPH DOBRIAN
PHOTOGRAPH BY ROY GUMPEL
The idea of turning Manhattan’s 42nd Street into a car-free crosstown artery, with low-floor light rail running river-to-river and the rest of the street converted to pedestrian space, has been kicked around for years. A generation ago, there was little support for it. The consensus was, “First, clean it up. Then we’ll see.”
Now, anchored by a more tourist-friendly Times Square, a gloriously renewed Bryant Park, and a modernized Grand Central Station, 42nd Street looks more like a prime candidate for the proposed treatment—and a shovel-ready plan exists. The idea—sponsored mainly by the Institute for Rational Urban Mobility (IRUM), a locally based nonprofit organization—has gained backing from several elected officials and community groups. So far, however, it lacks the critical mass of governmental support necessary to make it happen. In particular, Mayor Michael Bloomberg hasn’t given high priority to endorsing the plan.
Still, vision42 (the name of the IRUM initiative that advocates the project, as well as the name of the project itself) hopes that Mayor Bloomberg will get behind the concept in time to see it completed by the end of his anticipated third term. This is a feasible goal, vision42 supporters insist, if only the city government acts quickly.
“If the Mayor approves vision42, he would certainly want it done during his next term,” remarks George Haikalis, ASCE, co-chair of vision42. “As soon as he signs on, there would be ways to expedite the implementation. We estimate that an environmental impact study might take two years; then the construction would take another two. But that timetable could be shortened by a few months.
“At the moment, the mayor is trying to pedestrianize Broadway by adding walking space at Times, Herald, and Madison squares—the Green Light for Midtown program—and those efforts are getting a very good reception, with very few substantive opponents. If there’s momentum on that project, it will only make people pay more attention to vision42.”
vision42 contends that according to its studies, implementation of the project would lead to a $400 million increase in annual retail sales along 42nd Street, plus a one-time gain of $3.5 billion in commercial property values, which would lead to an annual increase of $175 million in city and state property taxes. Since vision42 predicts a construction cost of between $411 million and $582 million in 2007 dollars (depending on utility relocations and choice of propulsion system), that tax revenue would pay for the development in three years. After that, its supporters claim, vision42 will generate income.
“Our projections of increases in retail sales and property values are based on economic studies that looked at the impact of light rail all over the world,” explains Roxanne Warren, AIA, chair of vision42 and principal of Roxanne Warren & Associates, Architects. “Dallas saw an increase of 25 percent in both commercial floor space and the value of it, along its light rail line.”
According to vision42’s studies, the system would also generate $152 million annually in travel time savings, by reducing the amount of time it currently takes to go from river to river by bus.
If implemented according to the current plan, the trip across Manhattan on vision42’s light rail would take about 21 minutes, with trains arriving at each stop at roughly four-minute intervals. The line would run from the 39th Street Ferry Terminal on the West Side to the 35th Street Ferry Terminal on the East Side. A top speed of 15 mph would ensure pedestrian safety. The articulated trains would be no more than 180 feet long, and would hold approximately 300 passengers. In all, vision42 asserts, the project would carry three times as many passengers as the current bus system—faster and at lower cost.
Each block-long increment would take about six months to build. The plan calls for immediate diversion of traffic from 42nd Street, with temporary low-floor, clean-fuel bus service provided. The process would be made as transparent as possible to incite popular interest and approval.
Permanent diversion of traffic to other crosstown streets would be achieved via the city’s prescribed methodology, and north-south traffic across 42nd Street would continue. According to a traffic study produced by Sam Schwartz Engineering, most of 42nd Street’s large office buildings have their freight entrances on either 41st or 43rd Street, and thus deliveries would not be impeded. Delivery bays would be reserved at avenue intersections for buildings that have no entrances on another street or avenue.
Utility diversions would dominate the capital costs, it’s admitted. However, vision42 hopes that restrictive policies on utility relocation will be modified, reducing both costs and disruptions during construction.
A repair facility for the train cars would be required. Haikalis suggests placing this on a portion of the Long Island Railroad yards on the West Side, or adapting a bus garage on West 41st Street.
“The fare would be the same as for buses and subways,” Haikalis explains. “It would be collected by an external machine, where you can convert your MetroCard to a proof-of-purchase as is done now with the Fordham Road experimental bus in the Bronx.”
“There’s a federal formula that’s used in benefit/cost analyses of this type, which calculates the cost of time and the value of time, based on studies in which people have travel choices,” explains Sam Schwartz, president and CEO of Sam Schwartz Engineering, who conducted the traffic study for vision42. “We determined that the rail project is absolutely doable. The trains have absolute right of way, reasonable speed, and excellent reliability without serious negative impact on traffic. There would be communication between the traffic signals and the light rail vehicles, so that if a train were just going to miss the light, the light would stay green a little longer, or if the train were stuck in a queue the light might go green a little sooner.”
So far, vision42 has attracted support from several elected officials, including city councilors Gale Brewer and Eric Gioia, U.S. Reps. Carolyn Maloney (D-Manhattan/Queens), and Jerrold Nadler (D-Manhattan-Brooklyn), andManhattan Borough President Scott Stringer.
“I enthusiastically support what vision42 is trying to do,” says state Assemblyman Richard Gottfried (D-Manhattan). “Light rail makes sense for 42nd street and for the Hell’s Kitchen/Hudson Yards area. It can move large numbers of people at much lower cost than heavy rail—and at lower cost than extension of the 7 subway line. It has always been a mystery to me why the city has not adopted the vision42 plans. If you wanted to be conspiratorial, you could say light rail doesn’t benefit as many contractors as heavy rail, but Mayor Bloomberg has been very forward-looking and aggressive on other traffic-reduction measures, so why light rail has not benefited from his position is a mystery.”
Why isn’t the mayor currently supporting vision42? Some critics suggest that the problem is simply that it wasn’t his idea. Others say that considering the current economy, and the fact that the extension of the No.7 subway line to Tenth Avenue is still in doubt, vision42 simply isn’t feasible.
“It appears that the mayor’s main objection is that implementing vision42 will interfere with his extension of the 7 subway line,” says Warren. “The New York City Department of Transportation argues that vision42 would duplicate the 7 and the S trains. But those trains are deep below ground, have very few stations along 42nd Street, and don’t hit the waterfronts.”
Mayor Bloomberg, Borough President Stringer, and Commissioner Jeannette Sadik-Khan of the New York City Department of Transportation, all declined to be interviewed for this article. A spokesman for Commissioner Sadik-Khan reports, “Our main priority is to improve traffic in the area through the Green Light for Midtown program. You may also be familiar with the bus improvements we’ve made on 34th Street to increase mobility there, and to which we’ve recently added cameras to enforce against taxis that drive in the lanes.”
That, of course, brings up the question that many critics of vision42 ask: Why implement this aggressive, expensive project when augmented bus service would be cheaper and would not involve utility relocations?
vision42 contends that buses will attract fewer discretionary riders because of their perceived lack of comfort and the absence of a glamour factor. It’s the pizzazz of light rail that would presumably raise property values and retail sales along 42nd Street, and bus service promises no such payoff.
Critics, however, contend that the projected increases in property values are nothing more than wishful thinking and that all 42nd Street really needs is more efficient bus service, with dedicated lanes where other vehicles aren’t allowed. Some transportation experts are actively hostile to light rail, and some who were once enthusiastic about it have soured on it. Public policy consultant Wendell Cox, St. Louis-based founder of Wendell Cox Consultancy and three-term appointee to the Los Angeles Transportation Commission, says he’s changed his views on light rail because, in his observation, it neither gets people out of their cars nor reduces traffic congestion.
“Traditionally,” he asserts, “urban light rail is pushed by people who have a vested interest, who sell their vision by convincing people that to have a world-class city, you have to have light rail. Well, New York doesn’t have light rail now, and it’s not exactly Podunk. Rail car manufacturers make money hand over fist from these projects, when you could carry more people with an improved bus system.
“And does anyone really think that more businesses will move to 42nd Street because it has light rail? The project itself won’t create development, and whatever development opportunities exist will be too expensive.”
Yonah Freemark, who writes about transportation and land use issues for websites The Transport Politic and The Infrastructurist, says that while he’s sometimes skeptical of light rail proposals, vision42 looks sensible to him. The plan, he suggests, ought to be not only implemented but expanded. He advises a rail line that runs down FDR Drive to 34th Street, then crosstown to Eighth Avenue, down to 30th Street, west to Eleventh Avenue, and finally down to 14th Street and Eighth Avenue.
“The S and the 7 trains provide adequate service,” he concedes, “but these lines have some inherent deficiencies that make them unable to serve a significant portion of the travel needs in Midtown, namely short, three- or four-block movement, and connections to the far east and west sides. Those sections of the city currently have poor transit access and will need more commuting options as they grow into true urban districts.
“I’m not convinced, though, that a stop on every block as vision42 proposes would be necessary,” Freemark continues. “Six or eight stops on 42nd Street would be more efficient and probably almost as convenient for most.”
Would vision42’s main supporters be amenable to Freemark’s proposed changes to the plan?
“We favor extension to 34th Street, but not cutting down the stops,” says Warren. “This is not intended to be high-speed. It’s smooth-moving local transport.”
