November 28, 2006
Form or Function at the Fulton St. Transit Center
First rule of Fulton Street Transit Center: Nothing will go as planned. Back in 2004, the MTA unveiled designs for the new Fulton Street Transit Center, which would have included a towering steel-and-glass dome (the "oculus") AND connections between many different trains lines, providing easier transfers for subway riders.
But in 2005, the MTA said the project would be delayed and scaled back (smaller dome, shorter hallways between lines) and then earlier this year, the MTA said it would have to scale back the plan even more due to the rising cost of acquiring neighboring buildings. Now, the MTA has gone so over-budget that it may consider not completing a connection between the R/W at Cortlandt and the E train at World Trade Center. From NY1: "Without that connection, passengers could still transfer underground via the PATH station, but no free transfer."
Which has the MTA's board in arms. The NY Times reports board member Barry Feinstein as saying, "I won’t support a project like this that is going to discombobulate tens of thousands of passengers a day because you want to have a fancy roof." The station is already costing $847 million (over the planned $750 million), but another $15 million is needed for the R/W and E connection.
The a 50-foot version of the oculus would have cost $180 million, but now a 20-foot version will cost $130 million. Chairwoman of the MTA's Capital Construction and Planning Committee Nancy Shevell Blakeman also said, "There has been a recurring theme among my board members that we don’t want a fancy building and a fancy roof. We are not building cathedrals here."
The president of the MTA's Capital Construction Company, Mysore Magaraja, said that engineers would try to find a solution, but emphasized the lack of money because the budget can't be increased. We have to side with the board members - we'd like a beautiful subway station, but we'll gladly take a humdrum subway station with good accessibility between many lines.
Here's the MTA's page about the Fulton Street Transit Center. Another fun fact: Originally $50 million was set aside for acquiring real estate - but now that cost has grown to $157 million.
|
Reading about transportation issues in the city is always an exercise in frustration.
I hope they keep the oculus, its a different design and will make the building stand out.
Sounds like the Second Avenue Subway, all over again.
Saying that transfering would still available for $1.50 for R/W users, thats insulting! I agree that an "oculus" isn't so cool if the function of the station suffers for it.
sometimes I think transportation is just going to be too expensive to do anything about. At least new york has the infrastructure already in place to be conisdered a complete transit system. Chicago can't complete one new line without massive funding hopes from the FTC and mismanagement throughout the whole dilapidated system - oh and the corruption is equally as bad.
Why doesn't anybody try to solve this with sponsorships or donations? Certainly, if I had a spare 10 mil, I'd kick it in to have a pretty subway entrance. And if I had a spare billion, I'd be psyched to have the 2nd Ave subway named after me.
I agree with Kushal. I've been saying for years that the city needs to extract more from developers. There have been plenty of times when a builder has cleared a block near a subway station and could have helped make nicer, wider entrances. Think of what could have been done for the Columbus Circle station while all of the Time Warner Center construction was going on.
And the Second Avenue Subway is a massive waste of money. Totally unnecessary.
"not building cathedrals"??? Heaven forbid we get lgiht into the subway platforms. They're so pleasant in their current state. They can figure a way to keep both.
What about all these MTA budget surpluses we keep hearing about? Or are they over-budget? I guess that depends on what day of the week it is these days. Big changes need to happen at the MTA. It's a huge mess.
Devin,
Looking at the above drawing, the glass roof doesn't seem to let any light down onto the actual platforms.
Personally, I think those ancient 1920s glass sidewalk blocks would be an equally adequate way to let light into the station.
I really don't care how the stations look above ground. A nice stairway on the street corner is adequate for me (and an above ground entry booth with a handicapped elevator of course). As long as the platforms are clean, spacious, and well-lit, I'm happy. This $200 mil glass roof is absolutely ridiculous.
And the Second Avenue Subway is a massive waste of money. Totally unnecessary.
You obviously don't ride the Lexington trains or live on the East side.
I find it amusing how they were able to build the Subway system far more efficiently 100 years ago, when technology was far inferior. Guess that's what happens when any government is in charge of anything.
"not building cathedrals"
Compare Penn Station and Grand Central Station. Which do you prefer?
Something like an oculus seems petty until you consider how many people it will affect every day for decades.
Trying to ride get on the 4 5 6 line at union square is quite the production. I agree with Tom, #7 must live on the west side.