AN, I hope that you were at the eye-popping conference on emergency preparedness and management at the New School this morning or, if not, that you can listen to the first panel on the re-broadcast of the Brian Lehrer show tonight.

Missed it. Why'd it pop yr eyes?

It was straight talk from well-informed men, all of them good speakers, who gave the impression they were bursting to tell important truths.

The panelists were Bob Kerry, president of the New School, who served on the 9/11 Commission; Clark Kent Ervin, who was Inspector General of, I believe, Homeland Security (or, if not, FEMA); Martin O'Malley, Mayor of Baltimore; James Lee Witt, former Director of FEMA; and Michael Brown, until recently Director of FEMA, who said, among many things that raised my opinion of him, that he should have resigned two or three days after Katrina struck.

I'd been getting the sense that despite weaknesses, some of which you have pointed out, New York City was doing better on disaster preparedness than the federal government, and this panel confirmed my view. Problems at the federal level include. Still no nationwide first-responder communications system; diminishing funding for FEMA; FEMA swamped inside Homeland Security and therefore losing more funding; numerous Congressional committees to report to; no urgency or leadership from the White House; separation of preparedness planning from response management; no practice drills for first-responders from neighboring areas to get to know and work with each other--the kind of item that always can get cut from a budget. Kerry said institutions are failing: "The press gets increasingly easy to fool."

Because the federal government cannot be relied upon, the governors are working together, and the mayors are working together. Baltimore now has mutual aid agreements with Philadelphia, Pittsburgh, and several other cities.

Brian Lehrer's show will be rebroadcast at 1am on AM 820.

That stadium design evokes Atlantic Center (the one behind the terminal) more than it does Ebbets Field. Looks like it was designed by Bruce Ratner's in-house architect. It also resembles what Nets arena will probably look like, once Frank Gehry quietly leaves the project. As I believe and a NY Magazine article pointed out. He was only brought aboard to placate the "aesthetic types".

Funny. When they put those flags and banners on Atlantic Center a few years ago it ocurred to me that the design was meant to harken back to Ebbets Field. I wonder if this was the intention?

There are a number of rail transportation expansion projects in various stages of progression, including the LIRR link to Lower Manhattan, and ideally they'd all be funded. But there probably isn't enough money for all of them. In choosing between them, I'd defer to the Tri-State Transportation Campaign, which has thought about this question longer than I have. But here's my two cents about each one, ranked in the order I think they ought to be pursued.

1. Cross-Harbor Rail Freight Tunnel - A rail tunnel under the Upper New York Bay from Jersey City to Sunset Park. It is impossible to bring freight trains through the overcrowded Hudson tubes that lead to Penn Station because if one of them got stuck it would bring the morning commute to a standstill. As a result, freight trains that originate west of the Hudson have to travel north to Selkirk, N.Y., near Albany, before they can come back to the city. Ever seen the truck traffic moving over the Verrazano Narrows and George Washington Bridges? There's a reason it's so heavy. This new rail freight tunnel would vastly decrease truck traffic throughout the region by making rail freight faster and less expensive. Especially in an age of increasing gasoline costs, this project is critical for the health (some of the more extreme peak oil aware folks might even say "the continued viability") of New York City, Long Island and southern New England, and there should be a coalition of elected officials from those areas strongly supporting this. From a Peak Oil perspective, this project should be the top priority if we want to move food into the region in an age of expensive trucking costs. After some NIMBYism, Mayor Bloomberg backed down from his earlier support.

2. Second Avenue Subway - 16 new subway stations and two tracks in Manhattan serving a new "T" line and an elongated "Q" train. This would alleviate overcrowding on the Lexington Avenue line, bring subway access closer to people who live east of Third Avenue, and reduce traffic and automobile dependency on the East Side of Manhattan. To be constructed in four phases, the first phase would add three new stations on the Upper East Side. This project is meant to replace the Second Avenue elevated and the Third Avenue elevated, which were demolished in 1942 and 1956 respectively.

3. 7 Train Extention to Far West Midtown - This will extend the Flushing Line west of Times Square to two new stations, one at 41st Street and Tenth Avenue and the other at 34th Street and Eleventh Avenue. This one would allow for the densification of office and residential space west of Eighth Avenue, and I'm excited about it.

4. LIRR to Fulton Street Transit Hub in Lower Manhattan - This one would bring a one-seat ride to suburban commuters who work in the Wall Street area. It would be downtown's first direct commuter rail link. The lack of a commuter rail station has put Downtown Manhattan, the region's historic center of business since the Buttonwood Tree agreement that led to the founding of the New York Stock Exchange, at a competitive disadvantage with Midtown. This rail link is needed to keep Downtown Manhattan to remain the vital center of business that it has been for centuries.

5. "Access to the Region's Core - Two new tracks under the Hudson River to supplement the two ancient, at-capacity single-track tubes that are used by New Jersey Transit and Amtrak and connect Penn Station to New Jersey and, actually, the rest of the country. NJ Transit has been making great strides in encouraging people to use rail, from transit-oriented development ideas to their bike-on-board policy, to the secaucus transfer to the Hudson-Bergen Light Rail, to Midtown Direct service. This would further encourage people to take the train to the city and allow for more frequent service. Boosters of the project note it will allow another 120,000 jobs in Manhattan (particularly Midtown). This one would be largely paid for by New Jersey, so in a way its funding sources are different from the others. My worry on this one is that it would encourage New York City residents to sprawl out to Jersey.

6. Manhattan East Side Access - A tunnel connecting the Long Island Rail Road to Grand Central Terminal. This would allow Long Islanders who work on the east side to avoid the backtracking that goes on now when they arrive at Penn Station, saving them time. That seems like a pretty weak reason for a multi-billion dollar project, but it would also free up space at Penn Station that would allow for trains from Metro-North's Hudson and New Haven lines. The end result would be a more well-integrated rail system throughout the region. This project cannot be pursued except in conjunction with the Second Avenue Subway - otherwise any gains it might realize would be mooted by increased congestion on the 4, 5 and 6 trains (as if that were even possible).

The new Mets design IS intended to evoke Ebbets Field, as, I assume, was the design of the Atlantic Terminal mall.

The Mets stadium seems the least egregious of the current NYC stadia projects, since it doesn't include seizure of homes or parks. But still, is this the most important project taxpayers should be funding? Keep in mind that no team will ever leave NY, because the value of the franchise would instantly decline by a double-digit percentage. Same idea as when one drives a new car off the lot.

Did Christine Quinn, I wonder, find it at least a tiny bit ironic to get up last week in front of the cameras and talk about city budget priorities a day after the City Council voted 45-2 to approve the Yankees' plan? These politicians should be spending tax money as if it's OURs instead of THEIRs.

Thanks for the great list of projects, AD.

At first blush, $2 billion to improve the rail link to the airports is a great thing. But, upon further reflection, wouldn't that $2 billion be better spent improving Amtrak's infrastructure and service so that people have a better alternative to planes for regional travel?

Good design!
[url=http://ahgsxacx.com/mtid/voaq.html]My homepage[/url] | [url=http://ydckrfzq.com/snew/chyz.html]Cool site[/url]

Great work!
My homepage | Please visit

Great work!
http://ahgsxacx.com/mtid/voaq.html | http://jhwlxirh.com/luat/aqog.html