MTA spent twice as much on Second Ave subway consultants as it did on its construction - New York Post

The 400-page report from researchers at New York University also revealed that the MTA’s failure to properly supervise the outside firms allowed costs to spiral in other key ways: contractors and unions overstaffed the project, dug caverns for platforms that were double the necessary size and drew up station designs so bespoke that each of the three new stops has escalators made by a different manufacturer.

The analysis is important to straphangers because the transit behemoth’s inability to complete projects on time and on budget ultimately leads to higher fares and taxes — as it also takes away from service upgrades and long-promised improvements are scaled back or canceled to free up cash.

The Second Avenue line was supposed to be the first major expansion of the New York City subway in generations — stretching from Hanover Square in the Financial District all the way to 125th Street in East Harlem.

The MTA built the first leg of the subway through the Upper East Side.Kevin P. CoughlinThat’s double the 5 to 10 percent that transit authorities across Europe — whether in Paris, Rome or Madrid — spend on engineering and designing projects.

Boston took a page from the European playbook when it rebooted a flailing project to dramatically expand its tram system – the Green Line – after costs soared and deadlines were repeatedly blown.

In Europe, transit agencies have standardized the designs of their stations to cut down on engineering costs, speed construction and to make upkeep and repairs easier and cheaper.