Archive for February, 2010
Feb
26
In subway shake-up, line managers lose some oversight
Posted by: | Comments
Update (12:25 p.m. Sunday): For many people, a managerial shake-up at New York City Transit won’t mean very much. It can be seen as some backroom wheelin’ and dealin’ by the MTA. But this announcement from the MTA about some personnel moves at Transit is intriguing for what it portends.
The news is this: Steve Feil, senior vice president of the Department of Subways, is out at that position. He will be the new Vice President and Chief Maintenance Office of the Subway division, responsible for maintenance and some technical functions of the subway system and is going to help Jay Walder realize his goal of bringing more technological innovation to the city’s transit system.
“Steve is a respected transit executive who has worked in many of these areas himself and has done so from the entry level up to the highest levels of senior management,” Transit President Tom Prendergast said. “He also has a keen appreciation for the need to embrace and utilize new technology with direct experience in its implementation at some of the older, more established agencies like Amtrak and NYCT.”
He will be replaced Carmen Bianco, formerly of the MTA and Amtrak. Bianco was Assistant Vice President for System Safety at Transit from 1991 to 1995 and held similar positions at NJ Transit and Amtrak. Tom Namako of The Post reports that this will be one in “a series” of changes, and although riders won’t notice the impact, the way the subways are run on a managerial level will change.
The MTA says that the biggest change will come through a restructuring of its maintenance procedures. For the last few years, the Group & Line General Managers had been overseeing maintenance on a decentralized level, but this scheme had left the line managers bogged down in maintenance calls. The line managers will remain in place for now but will focus more on transportation and customer service.
I’ve heard rumblings for weeks that the new Transit team may be doing away with the line managers, and Feil’s departure moves that one step closer to reality. Until today, the line managers had been reporting to Feil, and with Biacno assuming control and stripping the line managers of their maintenance oversight, the storm clouds are swirling.
In the grand scheme of Transit, this isn’t that big of a deal. Riders won’t notice the difference, and it’s hard to say if the line manager program has produced a net benefit for anyone. In light of the current fiscal climate, the MTA needs to trim its management structure anyway.
On an other note, all weekend service changes have been canceled due to the snow. Enjoy a shuttle bus-free weekend wherever your travels may take you.
Feb
26
A new effort to target homeless undergound
Posted by: | CommentsFor many homeless people in New York City, the subways are an alluring spot. Getting in costs just two dollars; they’re open 24 hours a day; and train cars and stations provide shelter from the elements. Yet for the millions of New Yorkers who use the subway to commute around the city, homeless people can make the trips unpleasant and the subways unsightly. In a move designed to combat the growing number of homeless people taking up residence at various train terminals, the MTA and the Bowery Residents’ Committee have pledged to increase outreach efforts and the number of case managers targeting the subway’s homeless.
According to Heather Haddon of amNew York, a new $1.5 million contract is set to commence in March, and case workers will target areas such as Penn Station and Grand Central where the homeless concentration is particularly high. Over the last few years, the number of homeless people in subways has risen, and an increased attention to this problem will serve both social needs and commuter comfort.
Feb
26
Along Second Ave., handling buildings with care
Posted by: | CommentsAs the MTA has dug into Second Ave. along the Upper East Side, the agency has come across buildings that are not up to code. Landlords haven’t ensured that their buildings are structurally sufficient, but instead of fighting in court and potentially delaying the already-delayed subway line, the agency opted to pay for building bracings in the fall. Earlier this week, agency officials promised to do a more thorough examination of the “fragile” buildings along Second Ave., amNY’s Heather Haddon reported. “It really proved to be much more problematic and challenging than was originally thought,” MTA Capital Construction President Michael Horodniceanu said.
For the authority, this admission is a positive step forward. The Second Ave. Subway represents a unique challenge for the MTA because it is the first subway line built through a densely populated neighborhood marked by very old residential buildings. This city and others around the world simply haven’t witnessed the construction of a subway of this magnitude through built-up neighborhoods in generations. That the MTA is so keen to learn from the mistakes makes me believe that, if Phases II-IV of the SAS ever see the funding they need, the construction efforts will grow markedly smoother after Phase I opens in late 2016.
Feb
26
With money tight, has OPTO’s time come?
Posted by: | Comments
Throughout the world, major transit systems operate with just one person in charge of each train. In London and Hong Kong, Moscow and Paris, one-person train operation has become the norm. Using CCTVs and modern-day technology, one person is in charge of driving the trains, opening and closing the doors, making announcements and generally overseeing the trains. These systems run smoothly and have realized significant cost savings by cutting out a generally unnecessary employee from every train.
In New York, though, OPTO has had a tortured history defined by tensions between the MTA and the TWU. For years, the MTA has had the capacity to run OPTO routes. The L line has been OPTO-compliant since 2005, and with wider train control booths now in every train, nearly every other line could be converted into a one-person route. Yet, at every turn, it has become a major labor battle.
In 2008, Roger Toussaint nearly agreed to allow the MTA to move ahead with OPTO plans, and as late as May, Transit was moving ahead with OPTO plans. But two events put this off the table. First, the TWU’s rank-and-file nearly revolted. As a TWU Contract Bulletin from last year notes, many union members believed allowing OPTO to be the equivalent of “sell[ing] us all out.” Next, when the MTA and the TWU had to go to arbitration, the MTA withdrew its OPTO proposals. Much ink has been spilled over the “why” of it, but many consider that to be a mistake.
Now, the agency is going to try to eliminate conductors in order to save money. According to Pete Donohue of the Daily News, MTA officials have “quietly” asked transit leaders to reconsider their stance on one-person train operations. Neither the MTA nor the TWU heads commented for the article, but as the agency faces a potential $750 million shortfall, OPTO is clearly an idea whose time has come.
In an oversimplified world, OPTO, if implemented tomorrow and if the agency could fire all of its conductors, would save the authority approximately $170 million. I arrived at that figure by pulling the 2008 salaries from the Public Employees Payroll Database the state has established. The agency employees 3024 conductors, and all but 157 operate trains in revenue service.
That is, of course, not a completely accurate calculation. The MTA would have to pay its train drivers a few dollars more per hour to serve as the lone conductor/driver, and Transit would have to outfit it stations by moving the CCTVs currently in place in the center of platforms to the front of the trains. The one-time costs might be substantial, but the savings would be realized on an annual basis.
Even still, union members would object, and the MTA would probably have to overhaul their work rules. A very thorough comment left by a Transit employee on an August post about OPTO delves into the various problems with the current system and implementing one-person train control. Still, it authority owes it to its customers to try to cut costs via this path.
In the end, OPTO would simply give the MTA more flexibility. It could run shorter trains every ten minutes overnight at nearly cost to the agency as it now runs longer trains every twenty minutes, and this proposal would truly help spread the pain. In an editorial accompanying Donohue’s piece, the Daily News argued that the TWU should either give up its pay hike to save jobs or enjoy its raises while suffering through layoffs. It’s a devil’s choice for union leaders hellbent on saving every single job, but as the MTA sees its precariously financial state decline even further, it might be time once again for a push toward OPTO.
Feb
25
Amidst slush, Transit scales back service
Posted by: | CommentsWith a heavy and wet snow blanketing the New York City area, the MTA has implemented its inclement weather service schedule. For information on commuter rail and bus service changes, head on over to the authority’s website. For those of you relying on the subways to get around the city tonight, check out the inclement weather service plan. The B, V and W trains will end service earlier than normal. Most express trains will run local for all or part of their routes, and the Queens-bound G trains will terminate at Court Sq. It’s messy and slippery out there. So be careful on the way home tonight.
Feb
25
Is Walder hedging on 2010 fare hikes?
Posted by: | Comments
As the MTA’s finances have gone south, the authority has held the line on their preference for service cuts over fare hikes. Since the fares have gone up in each of the last two years and are scheduled to increase again in 2011, the agency is hesitant to use a fare increase as a fiscal band aid yet again this year.
“Throughout the situation,” Jay Walder, MTA CEO and Chairman, said, “it has been my intent to hold to that scheduled increase. I believe that having regularly scheduled increases is preferable to increasing fares and tolls in other circumstances, and we’re trying very much to stay in that mode.”
I’ve often wondered if Walder’s Moby Dick-like aversion to fare hikes is misguided. I’d rather pay more for the subway service we have than suffer through longer waits, more crowded trains and generally less convenient service. In a poll I conducted on site a few weeks ago, 78 percent of voters agreed. Still, the cuts are coming closer.
Yet, now the MTA faces a greater deficit than originally anticipated. By recent accounts, the authority is $750 million in the hole for 2010, and it is but only the end of February. Unless the economy turns around in a hurry, that financial picture will grow darker as the year goes on. “Our financial position is dire, Walder said yesterday. “I don’t think I can overstate that. Clearly I’d like to look at every avenue we can do for ways we can reduce our costs, ways that would be less painful for our customers and our employees.”
So maybe, says Michael Grynbaum of The Times, picking up on Walder’s hedging, fare hikes could come anyway this year. When asked about raising fares this year, Walder didn’t dismiss the possibility outright. “Well, I’m trying very much” not to raise the fares, he said. “It’s my intention to be able to do that. I’m trying very much to be able to do it.”
Even as Walder watches the MTA’s ledger, cuts can save only so much money before service moves from inconvenient to inadequate. The MTA has a baseline of services it must provide and a baseline of employees it must keep on payroll to run those services. Cuts can make our commutes painful, but unless Walder does something drastic — eliminating overnight service (costly in its own right), closing down entire subway lines, massive layoffs — the MTA’s costs are relatively fixed. Fare hikes give them an opportunity to cover a deficit without sacrificing the subway and bus routes we need.
As Grynbaum reported, transit advocates and watchdogs noted the change in Walder’s tone. “He very consciously did not rule it out,” William Henderson, head of Permanent Citizens Advisory Committee, said. “There was definitely a sea change in how he seemed to be approaching the issue of fare increases. At one point, it was not seen as a live option. Now it’s being seen as more of a live option because of how dire the situation is.”
Board members would rather avoid a fare hike, and New Yorkers aren’t too keen on paying more for a subway system badly in need of improvements. But when push comes to shove, it may be the only option left. Albany will not pass another funding package this year, and the MTA’s only means of increasing revenue comes from raising the cost of a ride.
Feb
25
An expansive rail solution for Southeast Queens
Posted by: | CommentsSoutheast Queens — the area of the city’s largest borough out beyond JFK Airport — currently sits in something of a transit dead zone. It’s served by subway lines on the north and south and has the AirTrain and LIRR tracks running through certain neighborhoods, but the rail transit options are not integrated in a way that promotes convenient or face commutes from the eastern edges of New York City into Manhattan’s Central Business District. While certain bus rapid transit/select bus service plans are on the table to address some Jamaica-area bus service improvements, rail options are rather mentioned by planners looking to improve access.
In an interesting and thorough piece at The Transport Politic, Yonah Freemark explores a few solutions to the Southeast Queens problem. He first proposes a city-subsidized fare for Long Island Rail Road that would keep intra-city travel costs the same as a MetroCard swipe. Doing so would allow for faster, better and cheaper commutes for residents in the Queens neighborhoods such as Rosedale and Queens Village that are serviced by LIRR but not New York City Transit. He then proposes a few additional stops in southeast Queens and urges a new Jamaica-to-Howard Beach AirTrain line that would serve as a connector between the A and E/J/Z with stops at Liberty Ave. and Linden and Archer Blvds.
Freemark’s plan is an interesting one in that it uses existing infrastructure and would require relatively low-cost investments by the city, state and MTA. For an area of New York City far from the job hubs of downtown Manhattan and long underserved by transit, implementing any aspect of this plan would go along way toward encouraging transit use in a car-heavy area of the city. [The Transport Politic]
Feb
25
How the Olympics ruined the 7 line extension
Posted by: | Comments
With the winter games unfolding in Vancouver this weekend, I keep thinking about how, had the Mayor’s bid in 2005 to secure the Summer Olympics for New York City been successful, the next great gathering of international athletes would have been ours. And then I start thinking about how the 7 line project — one now destined to serve residents of a real estate complex not yet built or even paid for — got its start in Bloomberg’s desires to see the Olympics come to New York. It was that same desire and the subsequent loss of the games to London that has led to the downfall of the station at 41st and 10th Ave.
We know the project’s recently history fairly well. The project’s design phase started in 2002 when Bloomberg launched his plan to develop Manhattan’s last great frontier, the Hudson Yards land. At the time, the Mayor hoped to lure the Jets from New Jersey with a stadium that would also serve as the home for the 2012 Summer Olympics. In June 2005, amidst massive public protest, the state legislature failed to guarantee financing for the stadium, and a few months later, the IOC, citing that failure, awarded the Olympics to London.
Still, the 7 line extension did not die with the Olympics. Originally, the project’s timetable was an aggressive one. Project Design Completion was due to be wrapped up by December 2006 with construction beginning that year and revenue service in time for the Olympics in 2012. Today, the MTA still lists TBD as the Project Design Completion date. Construction started on December 15, 2007, over a year later than originally anticipated, and revenue service is right now scheduled to start during December of 2013. The MTA will miss those Summer Olympics by a good 17 months.
Over the course of project’s history, the City and MTA have fought over nearly every aspect of it. The City, the primary funding partner for this extension, refused to fund cost overruns and an expensive station stop at 41st and 10th Ave. The MTA has had trouble securing a deal for the land rights to the Hudson Yards area, and the current $1 billion offer from Related is on borrowed time, already one month past the anticipated closing date.
What though would have happened if the Olympics had come to New York? For that, we hit the maps. Take a look at the map below. It is an excerpt from a special map the MTA printed in 2005 showing the potential locations for all of the Olympics events. (To view the map in full, click here.)
Any Olympics plan for the city included heavy usage of the Far West Side. The Javits Center would have hosted six key events, including weightlifting, fencing, wrestling and table tennis, and the planned West Side stadium would have featured some track-and-field contests and the soccer matches. To ensure capacity for those events, the city would have needed a subway stop at 34th St. and 11th Ave. and probably would have paid to build the one at 41st and 10th as well. Instead, the costs skyrocketed, and we’re left with REBNY’s protests, years too late.
So far, progress along the 7 line remains on target. According to the latest update from Capital Construction, the tunnel boring machines have excavated nearly 40 percent of the planned 9500 feet. The two TBMs are mining north of the 34th St. station cavern, and northernmost machine has passed under all three Lincoln Tunnel tubes, the more delicate part of the drilling. By the end of next month, we’ll have an update on the projects budget and timeline.
Meanwhile, we can remember when the Olympics nearly came to New York. Enthusiasm amongst city residents was decidedly mixed, but the subways would have benefited once the athletes all went home.
Feb
24
MTA dumps delinquent advertising contractor Titan
Posted by: | CommentsEarlier this month, in an effort to highlight ways in which the MTA can better maximize its revenue potential, I wrote on how Titan Outdoor Holdings, one of the MTA’s advertising contractors, had fallen $18 million behind in its payments to the transit authority. Today, the MTA announced that it has terminated its contract with Titan after the company failed to pay $20 million owed to the authority for 2009 and 2010. The MTA has draw on Titan’s bank to collect the money it is due.
CBS Outdoor will take over the advertising space inside and outside buses and on Long Island Rail Road and Metro-North trains and stations that Titan hard previously managed. This company has been managing New York City subway and Staten Island Railway advertising space for years, and the MTA noted that CBS Outdoors has paid all of its bills despite an economic downturn.
“The sale of advertising space is a critical revenue source, especially at a time when MTA is facing a budget shortfall of $750 million,” MTA CEO and Chairman Jay H. Walder said in a statement. “MTA can’t afford to bail out businesses that do not perform the contractual promises that were the basis for their selection. We’re pleased to be moving forward with CBS Outdoor.” All’s well that ends well.
Feb
24
Bloomberg questions retirees’ free rides
Posted by: | CommentsIf New York City’s students won’t enjoy the benefits of free MetroCards, Mayor Bloomberg wants to know why retired transit workers should too. As Tom Namako reported earlier this week, Bloomberg, on his weekly radio show, questioned why retired TWU members get to enjoy the benefits of free transit for life at a cost of nearly $16 million annually to the MTA amidst a budget crunch for the authority. “I’m just pointing that out. It turns out that MTA is required to give the TWU retirees a free MetroCard once they begin receiving their pension payments,” he said.
Both MTA and TWU leaders downplayed the costs. A Metro-North official noted that most did not use their free passes during peak hours and said that the MTA “[doesn't] see it as a center of revenue loss.” John Samuelsen, head of the TWU, questioned the Mayor’s dollar figure. “We have retirees that live all over the county, like in Florida, and they certainly don’t ride the subway,” he said. “They worked their whole life in the transit system, and they earned those passes.” Considering how he campaigned on a platform of MTA reform, the Mayor, long silent on the MTA’s current financial crisis, is shooting blanks here.
