Archive for August, 2007

culverviaduct.jpg

The construction on the Gowanus Viaduct is quickly becoming an issue in the F Express plan. (Photo courtesy of Wikipedia)

Everyone likes the F Express plan. Over 3600 people have signed the petition, and MTA board members have voiced their support. The plan would even give meaning to the neglected V train. But the MTA is throwing up a roadblock.

Over and over again, the MTA keeps saying that construction on the Gowanus Viaduct renders this plan impossible until 2012. Now, those of us who have been most vocal in the push to get this plan approved have never really understood how the work on the viaduct renders express tracks — unused tracks that would cost literally billions of dollars to build today — out of service.

Yesterday, we learned, via the Kensington (Brooklyn) blog, that two city council members agree with us. The MTA just hasn’t adequately explained why the F Express plan must suffer. The two politicians — Simcha Felder of Borough Park and Dominic Recchia of Coney Island — write:

The MTA has said that an express F train cannot be considered until 2012, upon competition of the Gowanus Viaduct restoration. As you know, in addition to the two unused express tracks between Bergen St. and Church Ave., a single unused track exists thereafter up to Kings Highway. Anyone who has ridden the elevated portion of the Culver line has seen the single express track between Church Ave. and Kings Highway used sporadically despite the scheduled Gowanus Viaduct project. We fail to understand what relevance the Viaduct has to the elevated express track between Church Ave. and Kings Highway, or, for that matter, the underground express tracks beyond the Viaduct, from 7th Ave. to Church Av. Additionally, we remain unconvinced that the MTA’s 2012 goal is reasonable timeframe for the completion of work on the Viaduct, and, transitively, full restoration of express service.

The MTA has also cited insufficient demand as an argument against restoration of express service on the F line. Based on the community’s loud voicing of their concern over this matter, including an online petition with more than 3,500 signatures, we believe the demand will be particularly evident when service is improved, and the MTA is offering its riders a more reasonable commute. At a time when the city’s leadership is attempting to convince more New Yorkers to step out of their cars and into mass transit, a fare hike without tangible improvements would severely undermine this effort.

While, as the Gotham Gazette notes, it’s not politically risky for anyone to oppose a fare hike, Felder and Simcha are using their platform to make a good point. We want more information on the Gowanus Viaduct. Will it really take until 2012? Is there no way to accommodate express service on the rest of the BMT Culver line in Brooklyn?

This line would have a positive impact on many people’s lives in Brooklyn. It should happen, and we shouldn’t have to sit through anymore vague answers as the MTA stalls on another construction project.

Comments (11)
Aug
21

The MTA is listening…to me!

Posted by: Benjamin Kabak | Comments (14)

Michael Rundle, reporter for Metro, one of the city’s free daily newspapers, called me last week to talk subways. Specifically, we chatted about the recent proliferation of blogs talking about the MTA and the city’s subways.

It all started a few months ago with the F Express plan. During the major push for this plan — which is still gaining traction among politicians — Gary led the charge with some help from Kensington (Brooklyn) and The Gowanus Lounge. With a new group dedicted to saving the G train setting up shop online, Rundle and his article affirm what those of us writing have learned: The MTA is listening to the bloggers.

He writes:

The message seems to be getting through. Elliot Sander, executive director of the MTA, recognized that bloggers were calling for refunds after subway flooding during an Aug. 9 press conference. And with the introduction of “Rider Report Cards” on the L and 7 trains and new features on the MTA’s Web site, transit officials are increasingly recognizing the importance of customer opinions.

“Yes [we read them], and yes [they make an impact],” MTA spokesperson Jeremy Soffin said yesterday. “Reading blogs is a good way of keeping in touch with what our customers are thinking. Like anything online, the information varies from extremely well-informed people to those who aren’t well informed. But there certainly are a lot of real experts out there.”

Now, neighborhood blogs aren’t the only ones writing about the subway. Gothamist and City Room both cover the MTA religiously, and Streetsblog keeps its eye on public transportation as well. In another realm, the tireless contributors to the Subchat message board keep tabs on the city’s transit systems as well.

For our part, we bloggers have learned that for us to be heard, we have to stay on top of both the news and the facts. Here’s what yours truly had to say to Rundle: “I’ve been very outspoken at times. But at the same time I have to really be on my toes that I’m getting the story right. We have a lot of responsibility now. Things move slowly [at the MTA] but they are listening.”

As I today celebrate the nine-month anniversary of this blog’s first post, I am on the one hand surprised at the traction I and other subway writers have gotten. The MTA listens to us and uses our words as part of a barometer on customer service. It’s humbling. But at the same time, it’s hardly surprising that subway blogs and transit-oriented posts have gained in popularity. This city, after all, runs on its subways. We’re lost without them. And for that, I’ll keep on blogging.

Categories : Self Promotion
Comments (14)

floor8707.jpg

MTA workers lay out the floor on the downtown IND platform at Columbus Circle. (Photo by Benjamin Kabak.)

It’s hard to find a station in worse shape right now than the Columbus Circle hub. The station — a key transfer point between the West Side IRT and the 8th Ave. and 6th Ave. lines — is in the middle of an extensive renovation that won’t end until 2009 at the earliest.

It’s not a stretch of the imagination to call the current state of the station is a huge disaster. Blue construction walls dot the station’s landscape, and platform sizes have become severely restricted as work crews attend to matters as large as asbestos abatement (West Side IRT) and floor reconstruction (IND platforms). While in April, I wrote an extensive post looking at the overall plans for the station, let’s take a peek, by way of some subtlely-taken Blackberry photos, of the current state of the station.

As I’m currently undergoing physical therapy at an office on 57th St. between Broadway and 8th Ave., I have the pleasure of navigating this station two days a week now. Progress is haphazard; one day, a staircase will be open, and the next day, it will be shut. One day, sections of the platform will be roped off; the next day, they’ll be open.

Mainly, what I’ve seen are crews working on the floors on the IND platforms. For months, the platforms have existed below grade with the trains. Warning signs urged straphangers to watch their steps. Now, the platforms are rising up, at least in the middle, to meet the train doors. Take a look:

Read More→

Categories : MTA Construction
Comments (11)

Leave it to amNY to bury the lead. In an obvious article about how the subways smell, the most interesting quote from a rider came in third graph, nearly 100 poorly written words into the article.

“The further you go uptown in Manhattan, and anywhere in the Bronx, it gets pretty bad,” Jamie Rocha said to reporter Marlene Naanes. “I don’t really know how to describe it.”

While Naanes then goes on to note that, yes, the subways smell bad and that New York City Transit plans to add 350 more cleaners to their employment rolls this fall, there is no follow-up here. This, people, is the news.

Is the MTA doing a better job of cleaning up high-volume stations through which tourists and working people pass everyday? Is the MTA neglecting stations based on where they fall among New York City’s socioeconomic geography? These are questions worth exploring, and yet, here, they go unanswered.

Over at Gothamist, the coverage of this article features an interesting conversation in the comments. One person astutely noted that public bathrooms in the subways would go a long way toward alleviate the stench on the platforms. While the MTA would still need to maintain a vigilant janitorial crew, keeping the smell in the bathroom is preferable to stinky platforms.

Meanwhile, speaking of things that stink, here are your your weekend service advisories. Lots of changes everywhere – but particularly on the West Side IRT and 8th Ave. lines. Stay alert when reading those signs. For the changes in convenient press release form, click here.

See you on Monday.

Categories : Service Advisories
Comments (4)

When it rains, it pours, especially along the flood-prone Queens Boulevard lines. (Photo by flickr user chrisj)

As the MTA and the City of New York begin the long process of addressing systemic problems that came to light during last week’s subway flood and subsequent system-wide outage, economists studying climate change say New York and other urban areas should brace for more floods in the future.

An article at LiveScience delves into the issues cities with aging infrastructures face as the weather becomes harsher. Andrea Thompson has more:

The likely intensification of extreme weather events from global warming could mean that urbanites have more events like last week’s subway flooding in New York City to look forward to in the future.

The flooding and subsequent paralysis of New York’s subway system—from nearly 1.5 inches of rain falling in just an hour—raised concerns about the subway system’s infrastructure and the fate of the infrastructures of coastal cities worldwide in the face of extreme events that could become more frequent in our warming world.

“This is the kind of thing that we probably will see more of,” said Kathleen Miller, an economist at the National Center for Atmospheric Research who studies the effects of climate change on society.

Thompson goes on to detail the problems New York will face as its infrastructure nears the end of its practical life. Ilan Kelman, a postdoc fellow at NCAR, said the city should invest heavily in its infrastructure for the 21st century because the drains and tunnels, some built as early as the mid-1800s, just can’t handle storms of increased intensity.

Of greater concern to me was MTA spokesman Mike Charles’ comments. In response to a question about the MTA’s factoring climate change, Charles told Thompson, “It’s too early to say on that… they’re not ignorant of it, but it’s so speculative at this point.”

Now, I recognize that global warming has somehow become a political issue. It’s damaging to admit that — gasp — the climate is changing and that human actions are largely responsible for the change. But that’s the reality of the situation. The IPCC has long since concluded this, and the evidence is all around us. Right now, the MTA can’t afford to wait on global climate change. If they do, just expect more and more subway flooding until it becomes cost-prohibitive to address the problems.

Someone somewhere needs to step it up in response to global climate change. Can it be the MTA?

Comments (2)

Back in March, Deputy New York Police Department Commissioner Richard Falkenrath spoke in front of Congress about the federal government’s woefully inadequate contributions to NYC’s anti-terror funding. Today, the government acknowledging that it was listening.

According to a report on CBS, the Department of Homeland Security is set to announce that New York City with get $52 million for security. A large portion of that – $37 million, to be exact – will go toward securing the city’s subway systems.

On the surface, this is good news. More anti-terror funding for a very insecure subway system is always a step in the right direction. All things considered, $37 million is but a drop in the bucket. This money hardly addresses Falkenrath’s original points – that more people are needed for subway security, that airlines get $7 a person while subways get about 1.5¢ per person.

The bottom line is that New York City’s subways remain a viable target much like the subways in Madrid and London were over the last few years. We’ll gladly take the money, but it’s more of a token gesture than a move to shore up subway security. Hopefully, we won’t have to learn the hard way that the federal government, so bent on its anti-terror message, should be doing more to secure our tunnels.

Categories : Subway Security
Comments (1)

One of the more annoying parts of modern technology these days are those buildings with the Captivate Network television sets embedded into the elevators. If you haven’t seen them yet, check out 250 W. 57th St. to experience the joys of being bombarded with stupid news, stock quotes, the weather for Santa Fe and other nearby cities and, of course, advertising.

Owned by Gannett — the very same publishers of America’s Most Boring Newspaper U.S.A. Today — the Captivate Network really takes the cake as the most intrusive, annoying and unnecessary thing ever to be put in elevators. Now, these TV screens may be coming to public transportation too, but with an interesting and beneficial twist.

Hot on the heels of last week’s subterranean communications meltdown, the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey has announced a deal with NBC — a competitor of Captivate — to install these TV screens in PATH trains. Ken Belson of The New York Times has more:

The Port Authority…plans to…[announce] as early as today that it will include eight small, silent television screens by the doors in each of 340 PATH trains that it will begin introducing next year. The screens will broadcast news, entertainment and train departure times as well as alerts on delays, track changes and the like.

As part of a seven-year agreement, NBC Universal will spend up to $15 million to install the screens in the cars and upgrade 50 or so displays now in 13 PATH stations on both sides of the Hudson River.

NBC Universal will also pay the Port Authority up to $300,000 a year and be the exclusive provider of television content. The agreement includes an option to renew the contract for an additional five years.

According to Belson, this deal is part of an effort by PANYNJ to draw in more money by signing what amounts to advertising deals with private companies. Curiously, thought, Anthony Coscia, the Port Authority chairman, had a different take on the deal. “People today want to feel informed about the mass transit route they are using and events that are happening,” he said to The Times. “This has turned an expense into a revenue opportunity.”

Personally, I don’t see this primarily as a way to bring more information to PATH Train riders. I see this is a big advertising boon for NBC and a way for PATH to upgrade their technology at no cost to themselves. They’ll get $15 million upfront for the installation of these screens and then another $300K a year for NBC advertising. If they can use these screens to display service information during emergencies, all the better. But it is first and foremost an advertising deal.

Now, I’ve been advocating deals like this for a while recently, and maybe it’s something the MTA should explore. If a company is willing to fork over big bucks to install the equipment in exchange for the advertising rights, the MTA could witness a technological upgrade with little cost. While some subway purists like to bemoan advertising in the system, it has been and always will be a key moneymaker for the MTA. A little creative — such as subcontracting out a text message alert service or an advertising pattern for in-system TV screens — could go a long way toward bringing the MTA’s technology up-to-date.

Categories : MTA Technology, PANYNJ
Comments (9)

Following last week’s communications debacle on Wednesday, the MTA is looking to establish a real-time text message alert system for service delays, amNY reported today.

Marlene Naanes has more:

Text messages alerting passengers that a train is not running are far from reality, but a task force the MTA created after last week’s transit meltdown is looking into the possibility. The group — the response to a gubernatorially ordered 30-day investigation — is also looking at possible real-time email alerts for New York City Transit riders.

“We are going to be looking at all of the electronic ways to communicate including text messaging,” said Chris Boylan, deputy executive director of MTA corporate and community affairs. “I think that the issue is not that we want to do it but what the technological limits are.”

While the writing in this amNY story is among the worst I’ve ever seen in a daily newspaper, that’s beside the point. As I noted earlier this week, text message and e-mail alerts are a reality in other transit systems. It couldn’t be that hard for the MTA to implement a similar feature.

But I have a better idea. Why not subcontract out an alert system? There are plenty of enterprising folks on the Internet who could design a text message alert system for the MTA. I bet the folks at Dodgeball could manipulate their service to serve a similar function for train lines. Text a train line to a number and get back a service alert.

It couldn’t really be that simple, right?

Categories : MTA Technology
Comments (3)

My former Woodley Park Metro stop lies empty. (Photo courtesy of flickr user DruhScoff)

Allow me to journey out of New York City for a little while and away from the beleaguered MTA. Allow me to depart from congestion fee victories and communications upgrades until this afternoon. Let’s instead turn to my former haunt (for ten months, at least): Washington, D.C.

I’ve written before on the WMATA and my time in Washington. What I’ve never mentioned here is that the WMATA was a contributing factor for my utter dislike of my time residing in the Nation’s Capital.

While ostensibly a subway system, the WMATA is infuriatingly annoying if you rely on it to get around. After peak hours are over — generally around 8 p.m. — wait times shoot up and forget late nights. The system shuts down at midnight on weeknights and 3 a.m. on the weekends, but if you want to get home around then, you have to leave an hour for travel. It was nearly always faster for me to walk the 2.8 miles uphill from the Kennedy Center to my apartment following performances than it was take the Metro.

Meanwhile, the system features two-track tunnels and no express service. While this may not seem like a big deal, the composition of the DC population makes it such. During government hours, numerous stops are very crowded as Congressional staff scurry to and from work. But after hours, these stops — and many others in downtown DC — empty out completely. Gone are the government workers, but the trains still open and close their doors at stations where literally no one gets on or off. When they don’t run extra trains after Nationals games and the crowded trains stop at empty stations and discharge no one, frustration levels are bound to rise.

And in terms of buses, when they aren’t busy running over pedestrians, they aren’t adhering to any set schedule. Night owl service is a joke, and buses just aren’t a reliable means of transportation in the city.

So with all of that in mind, I was amused and dismayed when this post on Subchat led me to a Washington Post article nothing that the WMATA may cut nighttime Metro service and replace it with Night Owl bus service. In no understatement, this is a stunning blow to residents living within the city limits of the District of Columbia.

Metro GM John B. Catoe Jr. gives the typical excuses for the consideration. He cites saving on costs, the seemingly declining popularity of late-night Metro trains and the need to lengthen the maintenance window for trains and stations. Opponents — and there are many — note that DC bus service isn’t an adequate replacement for Metro service, that more drunk drivers will be on the road late at night, and that subway systems in real cities don’t close early. As one rider puts it, “Metro needs to expand to far beyond what it’s doing now.”

The response on DC blogs is overwhelmingly against this idea. DCist chimed in with a well-reasoned post against cutting service, and the commenters on site went crazy. Rusty of Why I Hate DC fame, not a fan of the DC Metro by any standard, noted the “the stupidity of removing late-night Metro service.”

Having been back in New York for over a year now, I have come to appreciate the MTA and New York City Transit even more than I already had. For all its flaws — and I’ve been a harsh critic this week — subway service is always running. Sure, you might have to wait a long time late at night. Sure, rush hour trains are packed. But with this vibrant city comes a vibrant subway.

Down south, Washington, DC, may cut late night service. Can you imagine New York City without late night subway service? Can you imagine the cab fares and the grumpy revelers? For all the grief the MTA gives, I would like to give them credit for this one. They run one helluva service that allows for access to everything this city has to offer. Washington’s WMATA wishes it could say the same thing.

Categories : WMATA
Comments (3)

Sewell Chan at the Cityroom blog reports that the Feds are kicking back $354 million to the City for Mayor Bloomberg’s congestion pricing plan. This is a victory for the environment, for the MTA which will enjoy the benefits of the plan, and for opponents of a city overrun by automobiles.

However, despite this grant, there is still no guarantee that the congestion pricing plan will escape Albany gridlock. We can only hope for the best. Chan has more:

The secretary of transportation announced this morning that the federal government will provide New York City with $354 million to implement congestion pricing in New York City, if the State Legislature acts by March 2008 to put in effect Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg’s proposal for charging traffic fees in Manhattan.

The announcement is a major step forward for Mayor Bloomberg’s plan, but it does not guarantee that the congestion fees will pass muster with Albany and the City Council…Nonetheless, the substantial federal support for the project gives enormous leverage to the mayor as he continues to press for his proposal…

To receive the $354 million, Ms. Peters said, the commission must agree to a traffic plan that meets the “same performance goals” as Mayor Bloomberg’s plan. Ms. Peters made it clear that she believed congestion pricing was an essential element of that plan, saying “it would be difficult for them to meet those performance objectives” if the commission arrives at a plan that is “substantially different” from the mayor’s.

As the news filters in, advocacy groups on both sides of the aisle are offering up their views. I’ll have more from later. For now, let’s just celebrate the good news. The city, with some common sense in Albany, could be $354 million richer and healthier.

Update: Streetsblog has a run-down of the responses from opponents and proponents of the congestion fee plan. Nothing Earth-shattering there, and Walter McCaffrey is still wrongly claiming the fee is a regressive tax that affects the poor more than the rich. Who drives more, Walter? Answer me that.

Categories : Congestion Fee
Comments (3)