Archive for December, 2011
Dec
16
Photo: Vintage buses hitting the M42
Posted by: | Comments
As the Nostalgia Train continues to make its ride along the M line on Saturdays this month, the MTA unveiled its historic bus rides for the holidays this week as well. Every weekday from 10 a.m. to 2 p.m., the MTA will run its fleet of vintage buses along the M42 route. Everything, says Transit, is original except for the MetroCard farebox.
“These buses are a piece of New York City’s commuting past,” said Darryl Irick, head of MTA’s bus divisions. “I started my MTA career as a bus operator, driving these types of buses. As charming as they are, you cannot help but realize how far we have advanced when you ride one of our modern, low-floor buses.”
For transit buffs, a chance to ride these old buses comes but once a year. While the MTA rolls out its fleet for the bus fare during the September Atlantic Antic, only in December do these old vehicles run routes in Manhattan. Catch one now before they’re gone again.
Dec
16
Link: Inside the Transit Museum
Posted by: | CommentsSome of my earliest memories as a youngster growing up in New York City involve the Transit Museum. Housed at the abandoned Court St. subway station — once a terminus for the IND Fulton St. line and a vague part of some plans for the Second Ave. Subway — the two-track museum features comprehensive exhibits upstairs and a stellar collection of vintage trains below. Now that I’m a grown-up, I can’t run through the trains with wild abandon, but I will be hosting a discussion series at the museum next year.
In today’s Times, the Transit Museum takes center stage. Edward Rothstein reviews the museum through the lens its newest exhibit “ElectriCity: Powering New York’s Rails.” The exhibit, he says, highlights the way subway technology is slow to change: “It is also astonishing how much equipment from the turn of the 20th century was used almost to the century’s end. A wooden ammeter for measuring current was in use from 1900 until the 1980s; the system’s rotary converters that changed alternating current into direct current were used until 1999; a 1932 control board was in service until 1994. How is this possible, given the ordinary pace of technological change?”
I’ve always believed the Transit Museum to be an undiscovered gem in New York’s museum-rich landscape. As a little kid, Brooklyn seemed so exotic to me, but today, it’s a short subway ride and a jump back in time away. If you’ve never been, give yourself a treat and go.
Dec
16
Union, MTA square off over work rules changes
Posted by: | CommentsIn just 30 days from now, the current contract between the TWU and the MTA will expire, and while a strike seems rather unlikely, so too does a smooth resolution of the labor situation. The MTA, under Jay Walder, had pledged a net-zero increase in labor costs, and the authority’s long-term budget planning dictates such a result. Union leaders, on the other hand, realize such a commitment means firings or wage freezers for their members. It’s turning out to be quite a stalemate.
One of the key areas of concern for the MTA focuses around workrules. The authority wants more flexibility in defining jobs. There’s no reason why a station cleaner can’t also address routine maintenance concerns, and yet, as Pete Donohue reported yesterday, the TWU is pushing back on these issues. He writes:
The MTA is seeking dozens of work-rule changes it believes will increase productivity and reduce labor costs. Generally, it wants to break down previously negotiated barriers establishing the different pay rates and tasks for job titles like cleaner and station maintainer.
The Transport Workers Union is willing to negotiate reasonable contract changes, Local 100 President John Samuelsen said. Loading more chores on station cleaners may not fit that description, in his view.
“They don’t have enough cleaners in stations to keep them clean right now, which is why there’s a rat problem,” Samuelsen said. “Taking them away from their duties to do something else doesn’t seem to make sense,” he said. “They have the right to bargain over what they want — but that’s not something we’re interested in doing.”
Of course, as president of the union, Samuelsen won’t admit to any concessions in the pages of a major daily newspaper. They are going to come though one way or another.
As Donohue relates, asking cleaners to “change a light bulb or unclog the toilet” is but one in a series of work rule revisions the authority has requested. The management also would like to require bus drivers to help change tires and refuel their vehicles. The MTA wants to eliminate rest periods at terminals following end-to-end subway runs, and they want to cut the full-time staff who must work at least eight hours by 20 percent. These are no small demands.
Right now, negotiations are in the early stages, and both sides are angling for good press. The MTA though simply cannot afford labor increases. After losing out on a few hundred million dollars as state tax revenues fell short and the payroll tax was partially repealed, a labor increase would put further pressure on the authority’s bottom line. Bigger operational issues — such as system-wide OPTO and overtime reform — might have to wait it out as well. What the next thirty days may bring will have an impact on our transit system one way or another.
Dec
15
Transit: Targeted weeknight shutdowns ‘not a replacement for weekend work’
Posted by: | CommentsTransit is ready to unveil its Fastrack construction schedule. Starting Jan. 9 and continuing through the 13th, the MTA will shutter the Lexington Ave. line from 10 p.m. until 5 a.m. each night between Grand Central and Atlantic Ave. in order to blitz the line with needed repairs. The new plan, announced last month, is designed to save the MTA money while also speeding up improvements that can often drag on for months as crews navigate live third rails and avoid trains in service.
According to numbers released today by Transit, the systemwide weeknight ridership is only approximately 250,000, and the shutdowns — one per Manhattan trunk line per quarter — will affect between 10-15 percent of riders. Those riders are expected to see a 20-minute jump in late-night commute times, and the MTA expects to realize productivity savings of $10-$15 million annually. Transit says, that in order to minimize disruptions to travel patterns, it has targeted lines where “there are substantial subway alternatives have been selected for the overnight shutdowns.”
Meanwhile, the agency stressed again that these weeknight shutdowns are “not a replacement for weekend work.” While workers can target critical maintenance and upgrades during the week, the capital work will continue to lead to massive weekend service changes. The next Fastrack shutdown will occur along the Seventh Ave. line between Penn Station and Atlantic Ave. from February 13-17.
Dec
15
Time running out on livery cab bill as Cuomo stalls
Posted by: | CommentsIn a week or so, the ambitious plan to improve transportation options for New Yorkers who live north of 96th St. and outside of Manhattan will expire as it awaits Gov. Andrew Cuomo’s signature. The bill, finally presented the governor earlier this week, has been subjected to a tremendous amount of back-and-forth. Even though it has the support of the state Assembly and Senate, the governor has found ways to criticize it.
As Kathleen Horan summarized for WNYC, the hangup seems to concern accessibility issues. Cuomo claims that stakeholders want more licenses for cabs that are wheelchair-accessible while also noting that no one will buy these expensive vehicles. In reality, the medallion owners are using their lobbying influence to sway the vote.
Horan explains:
Following the summit, Cuomo said “even though government comes with the best of intentions, to redesign a system, there can be unanticipated consequences.” He said one of the main sticking points in the plan to allow livery cars to accept street hails is wheelchair accessibility — and if anyone would purchase accessible permits since the vehicles are more expensive.
“The industry says that nobody is going to buy those permits because it’s not economically feasible. They can’t afford to buy the cars given the revenue. That’s a big hole in the current plan,” Cuomo explained.
He added another key issue to be worked out is how the plan would be enforced. The governor has until next week to veto or sign before the bill before it expires. If he does sign, it’ll likely to be contingent on significant changes to the bill happening through a chapter amendment.
By and large, these are red herrings designed to obscure the fact that medallion owners — and not taxi drivers or residents — are fighting against the bill. They have something to lose while the rest of us have something to gain. The Times urged Cuomo to sign off on the measure yesterday, and I could not agree more.
In other taxi news, check out this great story on what it takes to test drive a taxi. In the heart of Arizona, Nissan engineered have rigged up a course that approximates the bumps, bruises and potholes of New York’s suffering city streets. The Taxi of Tomorrow must be built to withstand the streets of today.
Dec
15
From the archives: A history of futility for Utica, Nostrand extension plans
Posted by: | CommentsIt’s been a busy week for me, and I find myself without much strength to write a full post tonight. So let’s dig into the Second Ave. Sagas Wayback Machine and visit a post on a once-planned and still-needed subway extension deep in the heart of Brooklyn…
The proposed Second System subway expansion plans issued in 1929 called for subway lines down Nostrand and Utica Aves.
In the annals of New York City subway history, the Second Ave. Subway carries with it the grand stigma of futility. First proposed in 1920, the SAS went through various iterations, groundbreakings and funding crises before the current construction efforts relaunched in 1995. Barring an economic catastrophe, at least Phase 1 of the Second Ave. line will open before the end of the decade, and the Second Ave. Subway will pass from myth to reality.
Elsewhere, though, other subway expansion plans have languished for nearly as long as the Second Ave. Subway. While none of these plans have as tortured a history as the future T line does, many of them are common-sense system expansions that have been on and off the city’s transit table since the early days of New York’s subway system. Take, for instance, the Marine Park-Sheepshead Bay-Gerritsen Beach area.
Although Brooklyn’s subway service is nearly as comprehensive as Manhattan’s, a glance at the borough map reveals a large gap in service in the southern reaches of eastern Brooklyn. The Marine Park-Sheepshead Bay-Gerritsen Beach triangle is serviced only by the B and Q along Flatbush Ave. to the west and a bunch of local buses. To the north, the Flatbush Ave./Brooklyn College stop serves as a terminal for the 2 and 5 trains, and with Nostrand Ave. running south from that station, that road would serve as the natural starting point for new service.
In fact, that’s long been the dream of city planners, and that final stop on the 2 and 5 wasn’t built as such. Rather, it was supposed to lead into the Nostrand Ave. subway line. Talk of the Nostrand and Utica Ave. subway extensions pop up as early as 1910 when The Times discusses future expansion of the young system into Brooklyn. A century ago, planners anticipated a branch of the subway running out to the ocean, and the IRT awarded its Brooklyn expansion plans in two contracts. Only the first part saw the light of day, and when Flatbush Ave./Brooklyn College opened in 1920, no one knew this station would become the de facto terminal for the IRT.
In 1929, when the city unveiled its ambitious Second System proposal, both Nostrand and Utica Ave. extensions were included. The Nostrand spur would have completed the IRT’s early 1910 plans for subway expansion, and the Utica Ave. route would have been the southern part of the new Williamsburg train lines. A 1939 post-Depression version of the Second System had the Utica Ave. line reaching Floyd Bennett Field.
The 1939 plans for subway service to Floyd Bennett Field.
As we know from the history of the Second Ave. subway, though, a World War interrupted the city’s ambitious expansion plans, and the Nostrand and Utica subway lines were once again shelved for nearly 15 years. As the mid-1950s dawned and the city looked to build the Second Ave. line, so too did it give approval for the Nostrand and Utica Avenue extension plans. The Nostrand spur would again see what we now call the 2 and 5 extended south while the Utica Avenue plans were scaled back. Instead of a new line coming south from Williamsburg, the 1950s plan called for a spur from what is today the end of the 4 line in Brooklyn. The extensions were estimated to cost $82.15 million — or around $656 million in today’s money — and be ready for service by 1960.
A proposed rendering from 1969 of the Utica and Nostrand Avenue subway expansion plans.
But the city’s debt and deferred system maintenance led to a different reality. By 1957, it was clear that the two subway lines in Brooklyn would not see the light of day, and as transportation money went to modernization instead of growth, the plans laid dormant for another ten years. In 1968, the city again approved a massive subway expansion plan that included the Nostrand and Utica Avenue lines, and again, the city’s financial situation would intervene. Over the next three years, the bond request that would fund these expansion plans became a hot political issue. The city and state had no money, and many transit watchers did not believe the price tags for the capital plans were accurate. With Theodore Kheel, a current advocate for free transit, banging the financial drum, voters turned down the transportation bond request, and although another bill would pass a few years later, the Nostrand and Utica Avenue subways died in 1971.
On March 21, 1971, The Times penned a requiem for these plans. City planners thought the Utica Ave. routing would lead to even more overcrowding on the already-stuffed IRT lines and wanted to extend the Canarsie BMT — today’s L train — instead. The price tags for the two projects had reached $350 million in 1971 or $1.8 billion today, and no one believed that estimate to be accurate. These concerns still ring true today, and when Kheel attained his victory in the early 1970s, the Nostrand and Utica Ave. plans would become but another unbuilt relic of the subway system.
Today, the areas that would have enjoyed subway system 80 or 90 years ago are among the more isolated and car-dependent neighborhoods in Brooklyn. While the Second Ave. line, whose fate was seemingly intertwined with the Nostrand and Utica Avenue plans, is now under way, no one is advocating for service in southern Brooklyn even though the city would be better off for it.
Dec
14
Link: DC without Metro a capital parking lot
Posted by: | CommentsIn 1976, the first stations along the WMATA’s Red Line opened, and with it, came a new era of development and mobility for the Nation’s Capital. Today, Metro is expanding outward toward Dulles Airport, and talk of a purple line that would ring around the district, connecting Silver Spring, Bethesda and beyond, bubbles up now and again. But what would happen to the area of there was no mass transit network?
As it argues for better funding, that’s the question one WMATA transportation analyst has tried to answer. As Emily Badger at The Atlantic Cities blog writes, a Capital without its subway system is a strange place indeed. Instead of a centralized downtown area, the region would be choked with traffic, thus leading to more localized economic development. “We looked at that and realized we were watching the economy splinter,” Justin Anthos, the author of the study said. “All of a sudden, we weren’t watching a regional economy function where workers could find jobs in the whole region.”
As 200,000 per day take the Metro into D.C., Antos’ research found that to maintain such commuting levels would require 15 new lanes of freeways and 166 blocks of five-story parking garages. The absurdity of it all, he says, is the point of the investigation. “Part of the study was to put in context the choices that our region faces in the future, which are that we can either continue to protect and expand our transit investment, or we can basically just keep it static, or even let it degrade,” he said. “You can’t just say ‘we chose not to expand.’ There’s some other alternative that you would be forced to live in. And we have to take a gander at what that alternative would be, so we can make informed decisions.” It is a lesson our fair city and its politicians should take to heart as well.
Dec
14
NY Court: Selling MetroCard swipes not a felony
Posted by: | Comments
The selling a MetroCard swipe is a time-honored scam in the New York City subways. Some scammers purchase unlimited ride cards and sell swipes to unsuspecting tourists. Others jam MetroCard vending machines so that innocent riders have no choice but to pony up the dough for a ride. No matter the approach, selling a swipe has always been treated as a felony by the NYPD and New York City Transit, but a judge on New York’s Court of Appeals has upended that law.
In a decision (pdf) released yesterday, Chief Judge Jonathan Lippman, writing for a unanimous Court of Appeals, said that selling a swipe is not a felony because the MTA does not have a valid property interest in the swipe-buyer’s fare. The decision, which reports characterized as a “surprise,” represents a bit of a legal tap dance through state precedent on classifying felonies.
The legal eagles among us can read through the double-spaced nine-page decision. For the rest of you, Michael Grynbaum offers up a succinct summary in plain English:
This decision came as some surprise, not only to the Manhattan district attorney’s office, which routinely prosecutes this type of scheme as petty larceny, but also to senior subway officials, who for years had assumed that profiting off the unauthorized sale of a subway trip was a clear-cut case of theft of fare.
But Jonathan Lippman, the chief judge of the Court of Appeals, wrote in an opinion that the fraud, “although decidedly criminal in nature,” did not amount to an unlawful taking of property from New York City Transit because the transit agency never actually possessed the fare that it would have otherwise been paid. The transportation authority, Judge Lippman wrote, “never acquired a sufficient interest in the money to become an ‘owner,’ ” which the judge deemed a necessary condition for a charge of larceny to be filed.
Instead, the opinion said, the scammer could be charged with other infractions, like the unlawful sale of transportation services. New York City Transit, for instance, forbids an owner of an unlimited MetroCard from accepting money in exchange for a swipe.
New York City Transit would not let the good judge deter them. Armed with various other laws under which they could prosecute and ticket offenders, a spokesman stressed that selling swipes remains against the law. “No matter how you classify it, selling swipes is illegal and makes the fare more expensive for all law-abiding transit riders,” Kevin Ortiz said to The Times. “If you see someone selling swipes, we urge you to report it to a police officer or MTA employee immediately.”
Even as selling a swipe is no longer a felony, the scam will likely remain a misdemeanor under theft of services laws, and criminals can be charged with unauthorized sales of transportation services and with illegal access to Transit Authority services. It remains legal to give away swipes from a MetroCard out of the generosity of your heart.
Dec
13
Tax revenues for MTA $87M short as bad month continues
Posted by: | CommentsDecember is always a harsh mistress for the MTA. As the authority gears up to cope with inclimate weather and all of the challenges feet of snow can bring, up in Albany, the New York state legislature tries to pretend it isn’t totally inept as it rushes to wrap up end-of-year work. Included in that work are appropriations measures that usually mean a raid on MTA funds and of course, new tax measures.
This year has been a particularly tough one for the MTA. The authority is losing $320 million annually in a cut to the payroll mobility tax with only a vague promise from Gov. Andrew Cuomo that he will somehow find a steady or not-so-steady source of replacement funds. The state reappropriated another $100 million that was supposed to fill the MTA coffers while the governor stripped the transit lockbox legislation of any teeth. Now, we find out that the New York State beancounters once again over-estimated the MTA’s tax haul.
As Pete Donohue reported, the New York’s Mass Transportation Operating Assistance account, a key MTA funding mechanism, will be $87 million short of initial estimates as tax revenue was less than expected. For an MTA that was, a few weeks ago, looking forward to a semblance of financial stability in 2012, the news comes at the end of a few long weeks.
To make matters worse, as Donohue relates, this drop comes after two MTA Board members had lobbied hard to set some money aside next year to restore buses lost to the 2010 service cuts. Now, those plans are off the table. Donohue reports:
The Metropolitan Transportation Authority’s financial outlook has worsened since just last month, when two board members proposed setting aside money to bring back some of the axed service – which included 36 bus routes — sources said. The state Division of Budget has told the MTA to expect an $87 million drop in projected subsidies from the Metropolitan Mass Transportation Operating Assistance account next year because certain tax revenues are coming in lower than anticipated.
MTA subsidies from the account also are likely to be lower than previously projected for the following three years – 2013, 2014 and 2015 – by $58 million, $45 million and $47 million, the state has told the MTA. “We’ve been saying all along how fragile the budget is, and you can see we’re nowhere near out of the woods,” one source at MTA headquarters said. “Now is not the appropriate time to be talking about restoring service,” the source said.
The MTA budget going before the board next week for a vote will include tapping some of the MTA’s small reserve and finding other savings to make up for the shortfall. Additional service cuts won’t be in the mix, sources said.
That last bit of news, at least, is a welcome development, but it’s a small consolation for a cash-starved MTA that is also facing some tough labor negotiations. (Their current contract with the TWU ends on January 15, but no one is expecting a repeat of the 2005 transit strike.)
Meanwhile, to drive home the point, the Straphangers Campaign released their annual top ten lists of subway stories yesterday. They focus on both the ten best and ten worst stories of the year, and while the ten good items concern technology upgrades and better bus service, the ten worst are all about the dollars. The MTA has lost upwards of $400 million over the past few weeks as it eyes debt funding for the remainder of its current capital plan. At some point, the system and the authority will reach its fiscal breaking point.
Dec
13
Utica, Webster Avenues to get Select Bus Service, eventually
Posted by: | CommentsIn an otherwise mundane article on the state of bus speeds in the Bronx — spoiler alert: they’re slow — the Daily News let slip an interesting tidbit about upcoming plans for Select Bus Service. With an increase in the number of representatives from the Bronx now on the MTA board, the authority is under pressure to respond to subpar transit conditions in that borough, and as Daniel Beekman reported, the MTA and NYC DOT are exploring Select Bus Service for Webster Avenue’s Bx41.
Streetsblog started poking around DOT’s Select Bus Service website and found out that Utica Ave. in Brooklyn will get bus upgrades too. It was a big day for bus news. Yet, like every obviously smart bus route, DOT and the MTA will take the better part of half a decade to roll out some incremental service improvements. As Noah Kazis reported, these two routes have been under consideration since 2009, but the two agencies must still formulate plans and host public forums on the changes to traffic patterns and, of course, parking.
Ultimately, these two avenues need Select Bus Service, and one of them — Utica Ave. — could use a long-planned subway extension. Yet, we’re still going to see a tediously long process for these improvements. One day, the MTA will simply implement pre-boarding fare payment for its buses without a lengthy consultation with every single stakeholder at every single bus stop, and the buses will speed up. For now, we’ll just wait and wait and wait for another couple of Select Bus Service routes that might be ready before our next mayoral election heats up.
