The work began on April 9, 1991. The work included straightening out the dangerous curve, which was responsible for many accidents, one of which cost the City $12 million, and to widen and reinforce the elevated highway.

The widening of the highway required two easements which were purchased by the NYSDOT, from Donald Trump. According to a letter dated February 2, 1995 from the NYS Urban Development Corporation , the cost of the easements was $400,000.

Work was completed on July 31, 1996, according to the  New York State Department of Transportation (NYSDOT).  The Miller Highway was completely rehabilitated and the curve in the highway was straightened.

Representatives of the New York State Department of Transportation stated at a Community Board 7 meeting in June 1991, that the rehabilitated highway should last between 30 to 50 years, depending upon maintenance.

On June 23, 1991, Federal highway officials who approved the reconstruction of the dilapidated elevated highway between West 59th and West 72nd Streets said that they would look with a “jaundiced eye” at any proposal to tear down the reconstructed highway.

1991 - Governor Mario Cuomo had the Port Authority transfer $1 million to the Urban Development Corporation for a Preliminary Study for Relocating the Miller Highway. Philip Habib Associates were awarded the contract.

This despite the fact that contract # D253577 - (for rehabilitating the Miller Highway ) had been awarded by the NYS Department of Transportation, and work had begun.

Move to Relocate the Miller Highway Was Political Not Issue of Safety

Governor Mario Cuomo's “1991 New York, New York  Building New York City’s Fiscal and Economic Future”, stated:

 “ ....The opitimal development of the  current plan [Riverside South] hinges on the relocation of the elevated portion of the Miller Highway on Manhattan's West Side where the privately-funded development will be integrated into the city's public superstructure.q

....One important way the state can help the city and the private developers expedite this project is to assist in developing the inland roadway.

. ...In order to implement this pivotal portion of the development, the New York State Urban Development Corporation (UDC) will use its expertise and funding, to be made available from the Port Authority's Regional Development Bank, to initiate the planning feasibility and environmental assessment studies for the relocated highway. The cost of this effort will likely be $1 million.”

$1 million went from the Port Authority to UDC in 1992 to initiate the planning feasibility and environmental assessment studies for relocating the highway.

The Urban Development Corporation's (UDC), using the Port Authority's $ 1 million, hired Philip Habib Associates on Feb. 6, 1992. We do not know how much Philip Habib Associates were paid nor how the $1 million was spent.

Philip Habib Associates study was called, “The Relocated Miller Highway Planning Study”. No ambiguity – planning to relocate the Miller Highway as it was undergoing a total rehabilitation. The rehabilitation began in 1991.

The “Relocated Miller Highway Planning Study, Final Report, October 1992, p.10-3” conceded that the reconstructed Miller Highway better serves the City’s transportation needs than the relocated highway would.

Their report found that in terms of “providing safe and efficient transportation, the proposed relocated highway is inferior to the existing reconstructed highway.”   Clearly, there was no safety or transportation need for relocating the rehabilitated Miller Highway.

If you wish a copy of this study, please send an email to: livablenewyork@erols.com and put “Habib 1992 MH Study in the subject heading”.

 In 1992, while the rehabilitation work on the Miller Highway continued, $2.8 million was appropriated for an environmental study of the “demonstration project” in the Federal Surface Transportation Assistance Act of 1991

In 1993, the New York State Urban Development Corporation (UDC) issued an Request for Proposal (RFP) for an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) for Relocating the Miller Highway. Again, no ambiguity, the Miller Highway was to be relocated.

The consultants for the Environmental Impact Statement had to show that there was an urban mobility need for the highway relocation in order to be consistent with ISTEA (Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act) and TEA 21 (Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century).

Yet, urban mobility was not even cited as the rationale for the project. It stated "...The basic purpose of the Relocated Miller Highway, (RMH) is to provide for the better integration of the highway into the planned adjacent development and local street system, which will serve the development, and to permit a 23-acre extension of Riverside Park within the site of the former Pennsylvania Railroad yards....”

By omitting an urban mobility need, the UDC issued a RFP that was inherently flawed.

Parsons Brickerhoff  (Parsons) was selected to do the Miller Highway Relocation Environmental Study (EIS). Miller Highway Project PIN X103.27

Parsons Brinckerhoff (Parsons), began the study in 1994 using funds from ISTEA.

Parsons had a dilemma . There were two clients - the Urban Development Corporation (UDC) (now the Empire State Development Corporation - ESDC), and the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA). The two clients had different objectives. The UDC/ESDC wanted to use public money to complete Riverside South. And the FHWA wanted a project that met transportation goals of public access and mobility.

Parsons did attempt to find a public mobility need for the relocation, even though it was not in the RFP. They stated that highway relocation was needed to “provide unobstructed access to the Hudson River waterfront”.

That is impossible because the buildings in Riverside South block unobstructed access to the Hudson River waterfront.                                                                                 Street view of Riverside South Buildings

Although Parsons mentioned (II-2) that the new Riverside South Park was under construction, they failed to note that the new park will provide unimpeded access to the waterfront with the Miller Highway in place.

In response to a July 5, 1995 letter re: segmentation - from Congressman Nadler to Harold Brown, Division Administrator FHWA, in which Congressman Nadler attached a copy of the NYC HPD letter sent to the HUD in support of Trump’s application for FHA Mortgage Insurance. The letter indicated that the Riverside South project and the moving of the Miller Highway were linked. That is called segmentation and is not allowed.

Parsons was paid $4.4 million. All funding was stopped because the project was a clear case of segmentation.

• 1998 - Rep. Sue Kelly, R-N.Y., inserted an earmark in the 1998 House Transportation bill - Transportation Efficiency Act of the 21st century – ISTEA- 21  that authorized $6 million to complete the environmental impact statement on Relocating the Miller Highway . Parsons restarted the study in 1998.