Why New York City Stopped Building Subways (citylab.com)

New York City, which once saw an unprecedented infrastructure boom -- putting together iconic bridges, opulent railway terminals to build the then world's largest underground and rapid transit network in just 20 years -- has not built a single new subway line in more than seven decades. As New York's rapid transit system froze, cities across the globe expanded their networks. A closer inspection reveals that things have actually moved backward -- New York's rapid transit network is actually considerably smaller than it was during the Second World War, and due to this, today's six million daily riders are facing constant delays, infrastructure failures, and alarmingly crowded cars and platforms. This raises two questions: Why did New York abruptly stop building subways after the 1940s? And how did a construction standstill that started nearly 80 years ago lead to the present moment of transit crisis? The Atlantic's CityLab explores: Three broad lines of history provide an explanation. The first is the postwar lure of the suburbs and the automobile -- the embodiment of modernity in its day. The second is the interminable battles of control between the city and the private transit companies, and between the city and the state government. The third is the treadmill created by rising costs and the buildup of deferred maintenance -- an ever-expanding maintenance backlog that eventually consumed any funds made available for expansion.

To see exactly how and why New York's subway went off the rails requires going all the way back to the beginning. What follows is a 113-year timeline of the subway's history, organized by these three narratives (with the caveat that no history is fully complete).

Comments

Nothing about corruption?

[SuperKendall]

There's no way the rampant corruption and cronyism around construction in New York City does not have a massive role to play in all this.

It's a real shame, as other cities now have much nicer metro options and I don't nee NYC getting better at all, anytime soon.

Re:Nothing about corruption?

[b0s0z0ku]

For US cities, NYC's is probably the most functional metro system. It runs 24/7/365 for one thing, and is extensive enough to be useful. If you're comparing to London or Berlin, you may have a point, though those systems aren't 24h.

Re:Nothing about corruption?

[Applehu Akbar]

They call it the "New York premium": When your tunnel workers are all getting six-figure salaries plus cushy retirement, the city couldn't afford to build the system if all those tunnels were being drilled through a gold lode.

Re:Nothing about corruption?

[Anonymous Coward]

And their connections to organized crime. When we tried to remodel our newly leased office space, we encountered bid rigging where every quote we got was for the exact same ridiculously high price and long schedule. After a couple of union officials asked for bribes to reduce the cost and the schedule, we talked to the NYPD about it. They said over half of the construction unions in the city were directly connected with the mob. They even said we should just expect "gratuity requirements" for every job.

Re:Nothing about corruption?

[Carewolf]

For US cities, NYC's is probably the most functional metro system. It runs 24/7/365 for one thing, and is extensive enough to be useful. If you're comparing to London or Berlin, you may have a point, though those systems aren't 24h.

Berlin's U-Bahn (subway) might not be 24h/7 but only 20h/5 + 24h/2, but has tram systems and S-bahn (above ground commuter trains) that are both running 24h/7.

That is the not the problem with NYC. The problem is the reluctance to spend state and city money on it like they do on highways. It doesn't seem to register to US politicians that people that take the train, doesn't drive and thus takes up less capacity on the roads, saving highway costs. The cost of roads and rails are deeply connected.

Re: Nothing about corruption?

[Anonymous Coward]

Cause only techies building social media crap should opt for six figures salaries....?

A more accurate depiction of the subway's status..

[bogaboga]

The statement...

... today's six million daily riders are facing constant delays, infrastructure failures, and alarmingly crowded cars and platforms.

should read...

...today's six million daily riders are facing constant delays, infrastructure failures, and alarmingly crowded, old, dirty, noisy cars and platforms. (Bold mine...)

New Yorkers should visit places like Dubai, Shanghai, St Petersburg in Russia or even Singapore City, to see what a subway should look like and function.

Sadly, Americans still think they have the best and greatest in the world.

what's there to "learn"?

[ooloorie]

The subway’s cost-induced construction paralysis becomes more severe with every passing decade. We must learn from history in order to break it.

In different words, subways are too expensive to build and maintain and voters are not willing to approve either the fare increases or the tax increases to pay for them. It's unclear what the authors want to "learn" from that. In fact, it's more likely that more subway lines will get closed over time, instead of new ones getting opened.

Re:what's there to "learn"?

[ooloorie]

Uh huh. So tell me what's the alternative? Roads?

Why does there have to be an alternative? What NYC and what it will become is determined by its geography, by available technology, and by population movements. If New York can only function with more subways but New Yorkers can't pay for it, then the city will slowly decay. For some reason, that seems to bother you. Why?

Re:what's there to "learn"?

[ooloorie]

They are not too expensive compared to roads. If you invest in them and make them work, you have to invest less in expanding roads, saving you money.

That's like saying that a Tesla is not too expensive compared to a Ferrari. If you can't afford either, you'll have to make due without either.

NYC may simply be living on borrowed time. That is, NYC's problems may not fixable in the long term and the city will gradually decline. Cities die.

Re:A more accurate depiction of the subway's statu

[CohibaVancouver]

You'd have to pay me to get me to ride a subway instead of just driving

And in cities like New York, London, Seoul, Paris, Mexico City, Barcelona, Berlin and others I've visited you'd have to pay me to drive.

I have better things to do in my life than sit in a car in gridlock traffic for two hours when I can get there in 20 minutes on the subway. Life's too short.

Re: Uh, no.

[PsychoSlashDot]

Did you really just blame that on Republicans?

You are a fucking moron if you think it lays at the feet of anyone except Democrats, who have been in complete control for 15 years, and 89% of the last century.

I know you're a troll, and I'm not American but I'd just like to point out that all you're illustrating is that the damage a Republican does in one year of power takes in excess of ten years of Democrat rule to repair.

Re: Uh, no.

[Anonymous Coward]

Entropy. It's a bitch.

10 Despite spittle-flecked right wing screaming, Democrats eventually manage to stop the bleeding and get the budget on course to stabilize

20 Liberals begin to take functional government for granted and forget to vote

30 Republicans immediately destroy any progress made towards a stable budget and dig the financial hole even deeper this time -- WE ARE HERE

40 Liberals realize that you have to vote for non-lunatics if you want the government to work

50 GOTO 10