The Routes Not Taken Page 8
City Comptroller William A. Prendergast and Borough Presidents Connolly and McAneny toured Flushing on March 29 to again evaluate the type of line to build. The property owners on Amity Street continued their efforts to block the construction of an el. A delegation of Amity Street property owners met with Gaynor, Aldermanic President John Purroy Mitchel, Prendergast, Connolly, and McAneny on April 2. Connolly suggested that the proposal be returned to the PSC to reconsider building a subway. McAneny agreed: “We cannot build this line for three or four years. Why not wait a few weeks until we can work the thing out satisfactorily?”59
The question arose of approving the route of the line and then changing the type of line that would be built. Gaynor and McAneny said doing that affected property values.60 Gaynor urged the delegation to meet with the PSC. Accompanied by Connolly, they did just that, and met with PSC Chairman Edward E. McCall and the other members.
McCall promised that the PSC would reassess the plan for the Flushing line. On April 3, the Board of Estimate acted on a motion made by Connolly to return the proposal for the line to the PSC for reconsideration. Connolly spoke to approximately three hundred people from the Third Ward who attended:
Gentlemen, Wednesday the Public Service Commission assembled in extraordinary session told a large representative body of citizens from the territory affected by this proposed elevated line that if they, the citizens would appear before you to-day and ask you to refer this matter back to the commission, the commission would change the proposed line and issue a certificate authorizing the construction of a subway through Amity Street, Flushing, instead of the elevated railroad that has caused so much objection from the citizens of that section.
This great representative body of citizens that has come here to-day to ask you to refer this matter back to the Public Service Commission with the recommendation that a subway line be laid down from Lawrence Street to Murray Hill instead of the elevated line now laid down.61
McAneny interrupted with correcting language: “No. We will not do that. We will not go on record as having any recommendations. We will simply refer this matter to the Public Service Commission and let them do as they like with it.”62
“Mr. McAneny is right, Mr. Connolly,” Prendergast said. “It would not be wise for us to make any such recommendation. Let us simply send this matter back to the Public Service Commission for whatever action they might want to take upon it. If they desire to change the route from an ‘L’ to a subway, all well and good, and when they send the proposition back to us again, we can take it up again as an entirely new matter.”63 The matter was referred back to the PSC.
There were differing reactions in the Third Ward. Treadwell and Fitch took a wait-and-see attitude. Knab led a delegation from Whitestone and College Point to meet with the Commission members to discuss bringing a subway to their area.64 The Third Ward Farmers and Taxpayers Association discussed the proposal to use the Stewart Railroad to enter eastern Queens.65 The Upper Flushing Improvement Association, representing Murray Hill and Auburndale, the neighborhoods beyond where the line would again become elevated, insisted that were the line built through Flushing as a subway, they wanted it built that way through their area as well.66
When the PSC met on April 23, they voted to change the line, officially designated as Route 52, from an el to a subway through Flushing. It would become elevated again near the intersection of Matthew Place (now Depot Road) and Eagles Street (now 157th Street), and continue on to Warburton Avenue and Bayside Boulevard.
The line went back to the Board of Estimate. Its advocates were in for a shock. The Board deferred action, questioning how much a subway would cost. It was thought the line would cost an additional $200,000 to build as a subway ($8.91 million in 2011 dollars, according to MeasuringWorth.com). To the Board’s apparent horror, they now found it would cost $1.2 million more ($20.8 million in 2011 dollars). “This estimate puts a new light on this matter,” McAneny said. “When I tentatively approved this subway proposition some weeks ago, it was my understanding that the extra cost over an ‘L’ structure would not be more than $200,000. Now, however, I do not see how the city can afford to spend this much extra for one mile of subway in Flushing, desirable as such a route would be for that residential section.”67
Figure 3-7. The PSC’s map of Route 52 from its 1913 Annual Report.
This situation was further complicated by the interest that College Point and Whitestone groups had in transit service.68 The Third Ward Transit League, noting reports of the additional cost of building a subway, suggested that the Flushing line be built as a two-track line through the area to reduce costs.69
The issue wasn’t resolved when the Board of Estimate met on May 29; the matter was postponed until June 5. McAneny gave a report in favor of the construction of a subway, but only as far as Main Street. Given the costs, he didn’t endorse a further extension.
The next day, Commissioner Williams raised a point that McAneny brought up at the Board of Estimate: “The remainder of the route may be laid out by us, but that does not necessarily mean it will ever be built. When the time comes for building the road beyond Main Street, the Public Service Commission and the Board of Estimate may entirely change the plan. By that time, the personnel of the Commission and Board may be considerably changed.”70
The Board of Estimate approved McAneny’s plan on June 12, calling for the line to be built with three tracks to Main Street. As a second phase, two tracks would be built to Bayside. The Board began to look at widening Amity Street. The only portion of the street to be widened would be west of College Point Boulevard to accommodate the portal for the subway tunnel.
Mayor Gaynor died on September 12. Aldermanic President Mitchel was elected to replace him in November.71 Before the election, there was concern in the Third Ward as to what would happen to the subway. Mitchel sought to dispel those worries: “I am heartily in favor of the immediate construction of every rapid transit line that has been laid out in the Borough of Queens and when I am elected Mayor I shall take whatever steps may be necessary to compel prompt action for the letting of construction contracts for the building of the Bayside Extension and every Queens route included in the so-called Dual Systems Contracts.”72
Figure 3-8. John Purroy Mitchel in 1912. He was president of the Board of Aldermen at the time; a year later, at age thirty-four, he would become mayor of New York City. (Wood-Harmon Magazine)
“I may assure you that I am in favor of building this line to Bayside as soon as the city can provide the funds,” said McAneny, now the Aldermanic president. “There is no reason why the extension from Corona to Main Street, Flushing, should not be started within the next few months.”73 PSC Chairman McCall and Commissioner Williams made commitments to the Bayside Extension at the Flushing Business Men’s Association dinner on February 2, 1914.
The PSC awarded the contracts for the construction of the Flushing line from the Steinway Tunnels to Corona on February 5. The Third Ward Rapid Transit League had fears for the rest of the line. They saw how the cost of constructing the Jerome Avenue and Pelham lines in the Bronx had exceeded cost estimates. They were concerned that a similar situation would affect the construction of the line east of Corona.
There was also a literal roadblock to extending the Flushing line to Bayside—the Long Island Rail Road. The LIRR and the subways would be part of one regional transit agency more than half a century later; in 1914, however, the LIRR viewed the subways, and the Flushing line in particular, as competition. In order for the Flushing line to be extended to Bayside, it needed to cross the LIRR’s tracks and property, near its Broadway and Auburndale stations. The LIRR wouldn’t allow this to happen.
On February 23, 1915, T. Gardiner Ellsworth of the United Civic Association called on the city and the PSC to connect the Flushing line with the Port Washington line in Corona. Not only would this enable the establishment of the Bayside Extension at reduced costs, but it would expand on what had been proposed.
McCall met with the Whitestone Improvement Association on March 3 and told them of the Commission’s interest. He instructed the PSC’s staff to work on a lease agreement with the LIRR.78 There were issues to be resolved. The LIRR would operate Port Washington line freight and passenger service; these services needed to be coordinated. But this was nothing new: BRT trains ran from a spur of the Broadway–Brooklyn onto the tracks of the LIRR’s Atlantic Division in the summer to provide subway service to the Rockaways.
The PSC received the required number of consents from property owners in Flushing to build the subway. On March 10, they authorized action to proceed with construction, but first needed to achieve resolution with the LIRR situation.
PSC engineers made an interesting discovery while resurveying the area near the LIRR’s Broadway station: the land needed for the Bayside Extension was six feet to the south of the railroad’s property.79 They wouldn’t need the LIRR’s permission. While the PSC was hopeful about the lease agreement, they also voted to proceed with work on the Flushing–Bayside line on March 11. It would take another two years for the Flushing line to be built out as far as Corona, and more years after that to extend the line out to Main Street, so there was time to determine the next step. It probably wasn’t a coincidence, but Peters then sent a letter to the PSC offering to lease track space on the Port Washington and Whitestone lines for rapid transit service.
The response in Queens was muted. The Third Ward Rapid Transit League supported negotiations on a lease but wanted the PSC to proceed with the Bayside Extension, suspicious that the LIRR’s proposal came right after the PSC decided to proceed with its original plan. In 1915 parlance, they thought there was a joker hidden in the LIRR’s proposal.80
The PSC liked the idea of the lease. McCall told a delegation of representatives from the Third Ward community groups that he had instructed the PSC’s counsel to go ahead with seeking a lease.
There was debate over where to build the connection. The United Civic Association suggested that the line continue to run from its terminal at Alburtis Avenue (now the 103rd Street–Corona Plaza station) to Corona’s Myrtle Avenue (now 111th Street).81 Pople wanted to build the connection from a point east of Main Street.82 Still another plan called for the connection to be built just to the west of the junction between the Port Washington and Whitestone lines in Flushing Meadows.83
Figure 3-9. Queens Borough President Maurice E. Connolly. (Photo courtesy of the Office of the Borough President of Queens)
Connolly’s idea of what to do was in line with Pople’s, and he knew that where the connection would be built was less important than getting one built at all. “The one thing that is likely to kill this project is disputes among ourselves,” he told a meeting of the Whitestone Improvement Association on March 24. “Everyone interested should get together on the merits of the plan and on the method of doing it. A committee should be appointed from this meeting to confer with other committees and see that the people really want.”84 The one group not in support of the lease agreement was the Flushing Association, whose members preferred to stay with the PSC’s original plan.85
Peters told the Third Ward Transit League that Connolly and Pople’s plans were unacceptable. The LIRR wanted a connection built between Corona and Flushing Meadows. He thought it could be done for a cost of about $500,000 ($23.1 million in 2011 dollars, according to MeasuringWorth.com).86
The LIRR wasn’t the only company causing suspicion in Queens. William Randolph Hearst’s New York American charged that IRT Chairman August Belmont and the Degnon Construction Company (who had also been involved with building the Steinway Tunnels) had obtained land in the Flushing Meadows to fill it in and build the subway toward Flushing. The American implied that the IRT was delaying action on the lease agreement.87 Colonel William Hayward, a new PSC member, promised action.
Support was growing for the lease. Knab presented to the PSC a nine-foot-long petition supporting the plan. He then presented a second petition signed by the leaders of the Third Ward’s major civic groups.88
The LIRR made a formal proposal to the PSC on April 5 for a ten-year lease, with an option for ten more. The annual cost would be $250,000 ($5.77 million in 2011 dollars, according to MeasuringWorth.com), with additional charges covering maintenance and electrical costs. While the civic groups thought the price was high, they still supported the plan.
State Senator Bernard M. Patten introduced an amendment to the Rapid Transit Law to facilitate subway service along the LIRR’s tracks. It was passed by the State Senate on April 16 and the State Assembly on April 20. Mitchel gave his approval on April 29; Governor Charles S. Whitman signed it into law on May 10. The PSC was free to actively negotiate with the LIRR; Chairman McCall, President Peters, and representatives of both organizations toured the Port Washington and Whitestone lines on May 13.
This would turn out to be the high point in the efforts to build the connection. Work on the lease agreement proceeded slowly, making it impossible for the Board of Estimate to act. With all the work going on to build the Dual Systems Contracts lines, the PSC’s staff couldn’t devote much attention to working on the second phase of rapid transit expansion before finishing the first.
There was consternation throughout the Third Ward. Knab criticized the PSC at the Whitestone Improvement Association meeting on July 16:
It is suicidal to think of swapping horses and advocating a new plan at this juncture. We all know that the commission has a report from its engineers for several weeks; some of us have been given to understand what this report contains. The question is “why has not the report been made public by the commission?” What is the influence or influences keeping that report from coming out? We have a mighty good notion as to what that is, and before long there may be some rather interesting facts brought to light regarding it.
If the commission does not get its report within a very short time we are going to know why. Delay can serve no legitimate ends.89
Mistrusting the LIRR, the Flushing Business Men’s Association called for building the subway along Amity Street. This viewpoint started to alienate some of the groups in the Third Ward that benefited more from the lease than from a subway to Flushing. “There are 70,000 persons now in the Third Ward that must be served by this transit and the railroad proposition is the only sound one that we have heard,” said Charles Posthauer of the College Point Committee. “A line terminating in Flushing will never meet the needs of the community. If it ends there, there is no hope for the other sections getting transit for years; there is too little money now.”90
The talks between the LIRR and the PSC were delayed throughout the summer of 1915. The PSC did offer $150,000 per year for the lease ($3.45 million in 2011 dollars, according to MeasuringWorth.com); the LIRR said it was amenable to reduce its original demand,91 but nothing was put on paper. It wasn’t until August 11 that a meeting took place at McAneny’s apartment at the Ritz-Carlton Hotel in Manhattan. Progress was reported, but no agreement was imminent.
A second meeting took place in September. McAneny told the LIRR that the proposed rent of $250,000 per year ($5.77 million in 2011) was unacceptable. He forced a reduction to $125,000 ($2.89 million in 2011) for the first year, with an increase of 8 percent for each year of the
contract. Third Ward civic group representatives met and drafted a letter to Mitchel, McAneny, and McCall endorsing the new proposal. McAneny and McCall responded positively, but nothing was heard from the LIRR or IRT until October, when Peters wrote to McCall to say the rental fees were acceptable.
That was where everything stood for more than a year. It seemed as if the PSC and LIRR wanted to proceed. The communities along the Port Washington and Whitestone lines certainly wanted subways, even with a second fare paid by those who lived east or north of Flushing. The elected officials wanted to take the next step. But problems remained. The IRT and BRT appeared to be unwilling to use the LIRR’s tracks, and New York City’s Corporation Counsel had advised Mitchel and the Board of Estimate that they couldn’t compel either company to do so.92 The year 1916 wound up being one of stalemate, and the Third Ward grew impatient. The Whitestone Improvement Association was so frustrated that they approved a resolution asking the PSC to build the subway to Amity and Main Streets, even though their community wouldn’t directly benefit from it.93
PSC Chief Engineer Alfred Craven prepared a report justifying the connection with the LIRR. He estimated that 20,600 passengers per day would ride the subway along the Port Washington and Whitestone lines in each direction in 1920, a number that would rise to 34,000 by 1927 (by comparison, close to three times as many riders now board the No. 7 line at Main Street alone). The report called for elimination of all grade crossings over the Port Washington and Whitestone lines, although Craven thought this could be done over time.94 He noted that the extension of subway service to and beyond Flushing would significantly increase the assessed valuation of land in the entire Third Ward, providing the funds needed to offset any operating deficits. This allowed him to convince the IRT and BRT to provide service: