Congestion Zoning

Written by Nicole Gelinas on . Posted in Opinion.





Nicole Gelinas
(Illustration Credit: Lisanne Gagnon)

City Hall has identified a problem plaguing midtown: a dearth of tall glass towers. With 314 days left, Mayor Bloomberg wants to rush through a rezoning of the area around Grand Central. City Council Speaker Christine Quinn should show her independence by slowing this thing down—to make sure that new skyscrapers above ground don’t cause dangerous transit crushes below ground.

Bloomberg wants “iconic new buildings” for midtown East, he said last week in his final State of the City address. “Zoning regulations around Grand Central effectively prohibit development,” he said, “even though the area has the best mass transit links in the entire country.”

The mayor said that changing the law is now or never. “Given all the politics and special interests, if we don’t do it this year, it may never get done,” he warned.

But to see why midtown residents and commuters can’t trust the city to make sure that its subway system keeps up with daytime population growth, just look to Brooklyn. Nearly a decade ago, in 2005, the City Council approved Bloomberg’s rezoning of much of Williamsburg and Greenpoint to allow for dense residential construction.

Ridership on the L train into Manhattan soared. Between 2005 and 2010 weekday ridership increased by a third to nearly 132,000 people. Even as the MTA increased service, rush hour trains remained overcrowded. The state-run MTA noted in 2011 that “trains continue to carry loads above guidelines,” meaning that standing passengers don’t get their allotted three square feet. Commuters could wait for three trains to pass by before they could squeeze on.

This was predictable. Ridership was growing before the rezoning. But residents have had to lobby heavily to get more service, and they have had to wait. Today things are marginally better. But it won’t be until this autumn that the MTA adds a waterfront bus service to ease travel within growing Brooklyn neighborhoods.

If the City Council allows for midtown rezoning now and transit fixes later, midtown will have the same problem. “The Lexington Avenue line”—the 4, 5 and 6 trains—“is at 116 percent capacity today, even before you add density,” notes City Councilman Dan Garodnick, who represents the area around Grand Central as well as parts of the Upper East Side.

Subway waiting areas at Grand Central are uncomfortably overcrowded even off-rush hours. Commuters gingerly pick their way around bulky staircases on narrow platforms.

Yes, the full Second Avenue Subway project, which would go from 125th Street to Hanover Square downtown, would eventually ease crowding. But the key word is eventually. The MTA is building only “phase one”: three new stations plus one new transfer on the Upper East Side, out of a planned 16 for the whole route.

The Bloomberg folks have nodded to worries about more midtown subway crowding. Last month they said they’d require developers looking to build more densely to contribute to transit improvements. Those projects would include $400 million for the MTA to fix platforms and make other improvements at Grand Central and at 53rd Street.

But why hasn’t the city already done this? Lexington conditions have been intolerable for a decade. As Garodnick says, the Lex line needs bigger platforms “with or without any rezoning.”

Bloomberg has skimped on transit elsewhere, too. To save $500 million, he cut one of two planned stations with the city’s funding of the MTA’s extension of the No. 7 train, from Times Square to the far West Side. That decision doomed future commuters to long walks in the cold or heat.

Speaker Quinn should be in no hurry to rezone midtown. She should propose postponing the project for three years. That would give the current mayor and the next mayor time to fix the city’s budget so that New York can build underground before inviting developers to build above ground.

Bloomberg or his successor could pay for $400 million worth of transit improvements with just 17 days’ worth of spending on public workers’ health care benefits.

To paraphrase Bloomberg, if New York can’t do this now, it never will—which means we can’t afford more people in midtown later—not without condemning them to a miserable quality of life.

Nicole Gelinas is a contributing editor to the Manhattan Institute’s City Journal. This is her debut monthly column for City & State. @nicolegelinas on Twitter. Gelinas will be filling in for Susan Del Percio, who is on hiatus from the paper to serve as director of communications for Joe Lhota’s New York City mayoral campaign.





Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

  • John Prather

    What an incredibly novel idea…planning ahead.

  • http://profiles.yahoo.com/u/QCT4TEPHC2KYHLKR7IAWFVSL7I Ken Smith

    Well, what do you know, even a broken clock is right twice a day.
    She must live around there.
    If we want to read the propaganda of the Manhattan Institute we would read the NYPost editorials in the morning…

    • http://www.facebook.com/benpaganelli Ben Paganelli

      I’m not sure you understand what that phrase means.

      It seems like you’re surprised that Ms Gelinas has expressed an opinion that you agree with, which is contrary to what she usually expresses, rather than being surprised that the position from which she never moves finally has merit in this circumstance.

      Neither is correct.

      She routinely takes positions both with and against the city. She pushes for common sense and innovative solutions to mass transit issues. In 2009 she wrote a book advocating for tighter regulations of Wall St.

      Her position in this circumstance has merit because she approaches each issue she writes about in a thoughtful and rational way.

      Good ideas can come from anywhere and pre-judging ideas based on the title of the publication or institute which sponsors them does a great disservice to the public discourse we all should participate in without prejudice.

  • Oscar Hernandez

    It’s always incredibly refreshing to see someone not totally persuaded by the rhetoric of “global competitiveness” and actually digging more deeply to understand the planning folly of building more and not reliably building more transit. Thanks for the article.

  • 1spresidente

    Notes to our mayor: Glass is not a good insulator, R-1, R-2(double glazed) or up to R-3 (triple glazed) maybe. It does not add to the city’s sustainability with extreme heat coming. Masonry better.

    Also, where up-zonings have been implemented by the CPC it is premised on sufficient local public transit. MTA late-night and weekend service cuts make car purchases parking absolutely necessary. This is very true of the outer-boro’s.

    Third, the mayor should have said that zoning reg’s deter FURTHER development. GC isn’t Atlantic Yards. It’s developed, not blighted, not slum, not underdeveloped(except if you’re a developer out for the last buck).

  • HamTech87

    Why increase density at Grand Central? There are other places to grow, like Hudson Yards and the area around Penn Station, Wall Street, downtown Brooklyn, and LIC. Then there are less obvious but interesting places like downtown South Bronx (near the courthouses and Yankee Stadium), and downtown Flushing. Both of these areas “feel” like good urban centers with good transit, despite the EDC’s efforts to turn Flushing into a suburban, car-based mall.

    I keep wondering whether East Side Access was necessary now that we know Brooklyn is becoming a center all its own. Hopefully, the severed one-seat ride on the LIRR to Brooklyn won’t deter future riders. If I were a recent college-grad living with my parents on Long Island, I’d much prefer to work in downtown Brooklyn than in midtown.

  • http://twitter.com/ryanharris73 Ryan Harris

    All well and good – except the part about the city expanding transit. The subways are owned and operated by the MTA, which happens to be a state agency. Yes, the city is paying for the 7 train extension to Hudson Yards – which is a first – but any improvements to the Lex line would be the responsibility of the MTA. The Mayor can lobby for improvements to existing lines, but they’d likely have to get in line behind the MTA’s other priorities.

  • http://www.facebook.com/jared.t.rodriguez Jared Rodriguez

    There were many in New York that believed that Manhattan was overbuilt in 1900. Where would we be if we listened?

    Here’s a novel idea: Governor Cuomo should stop raiding funds dedicated to the MTA, quit being a “car guy,” and invest in NYC transit infrastructure. Manhattan is his breadbasket. Yet, he denies its existence when it comes to transportation. Yes, let’s throw $6 Billion at the suburbs and long-distance trucking; here’s lookin’ at you Tappan Zee Bridge!

  • http://www.facebook.com/yomam1 Yoma Ma

    Thank god for his majesty Bloomberg- I guess he needs to satisfy his real estate buddies as best he can before he gets out. All the Pols seem to get drunk on power before they depart.