Second Ave. Sagas | A New York City Subway Blog

At capital construction, is it bloat or not enough resources?

Benjamin Kabak — Tue, 09 Feb 2010 06:28:00 +0000

At a meeting at the end of July in 2003, the MTA Board decided to form the Capital Construction Company. An offshoot of the construction shops within the various agencies and an attempt at consolidating construction efforts, Capital Construction was designed to serve as a clearinghouse for all major capital programs, as the MTA said in a press release. On the precipice of a once-in-a-generation expansion effort that would see the authority build a new subway line for the first time in decades, people with specialized knowledge had to oversee the efforts.

At the time, the MTA lauded its new internal division. Then-MTA Chair Peter Kalikow had just appointed Mysore Nagarajan to head up the agency, and a bright future seemed on the horizon as the MTA prepared to build the Second Ave. Subway, the 7 line extension, the East Side Access tunnel, the Fulton St. transit hub and the new South Ferry terminal. “Moving these mega projects forward is a real challenge,” Kalikow said at the time. “We are confident that Mysore Nagaraja is the ideal person to get these jobs done, on time and within budget.”

Fast forward nearly seven years and things have not gone according to plan. The Second Ave. Subway, originally set for a Phase I completion in 2012, may open in 2017 if we’re lucky. The Fulton St. Hub is seven years later and nearly 100 percent over budget. The South Ferry Terminal opened 14 months late and with engineering difficulties that continue to this very day. The smooth sailing that Kalikow predicted in 2003 hasn’t come to pass.

In The Post yesterday, Tom Namako offered up a seemingly tortured history of MTA Capital Construction and blamed institutional bloat for the authority’s construction woes. Namako reports:

Salaries and staff at the MTA division charged with overseeing the transit agency’s $15 billion in megaprojects have ballooned for five straight years — even though many of its high-profile construction jobs fell behind schedule and ran over budget during that time. MTA Capital Construction staffing skyrocketed from 39 employees in 2004 to 151 in 2009, increasing total payroll by $10.6 million, according to records obtained by The Post.

The division’s ranks were filled with construction experts and engineers whose job it is to make sure contractors hit deadlines and don’t overspend, and to manage the $21 billion budget that includes the Second Avenue Subway and scores of station rehabs. Total payroll in 2004 — a year after the division was created — was $4.1 million. By 2009, it had grown to $14.7 million… But the MTA said the approved budget for 2010 reduced salaries and staff in the division.

Total payroll was decreased by $1.5 million, and the head count dropped by 21. When the division was created, the intent was to always keep head count below 150, a goal it has hit, said MTA spokesman Jeremy Soffin. And that’s even as the cost of mega-project contracts has increased by 187 percent and the number of contractor employees will grow by 284 percent, which happens because special construction work — like boring massive tunnels — has begun, Soffin said.

I understand the point The Post is trying to make. The money spent on capital construction has exploded in recent years, and at a time when the MTA’s operating budget is taxed, its capital expenditures have come under fire. Yet, this article seems to miss the point.

The better question about these numbers isn’t the what of it; rather, it’s the why of it. Why have costs grown so steeply over the last seven years? Since 2004, when many of the capital projects were simply plans and schematics on paper, the MTA has started digging out three train tunnels and is deploying numerous workers at sites across the city. If anything, the pace of projects has slowed because there aren’t enough people ensuring that the projects are on pace and on target. After all, when was the last time New York City witnessed any multi-billion-dollar construction projects let alone three at once?

In the end, one of the problems facing the MTA seven years ago was one of knowledge. It seems today as though the MTA and its Capital Construction department were ill prepared for the demands of new subway construction amidst a densely populated city with aging infrastructure. Lately, the various projects are proceeding on pace, and timelines and costs have settled. But there’s no denying that MTA Capital Construction had a rocky start. It’s no so much a matter of bloat as it is growing pains.

More money for the MTA, but at the expense of NYC businesses

Benjamin Kabak — Mon, 08 Feb 2010 23:36:56 +0000

David Paterson taketh away, and then David Paterson giveth. Just over two weeks ago, when David Paterson unveiled his executive budget for the 2010-2011 fiscal year, it contained a shock for the MTA. Payroll tax receipts were project to be $104 million less than originally anticipated, and the MTA’s overall budget hole has grown to nearly $800 million since then.

Today, Paterson announced his 21-day amendments to the Executive Budget, and the MTA should net an additional $230 million in 2010. “The new proposal I am putting forward will provide relief to straphangers, as the MTA makes the difficult decisions necessary to balance its budget during an historic fiscal crisis that is significantly impacting all levels of government,” Governor Paterson said in a statement. “In addition, it also makes key improvements to the current tax structure, promoting regional equity and delivering relief to small businesses.”

Before we rejoice, a few caveats: First, this budget adjustment simply corrects for Albany’s originally overly optimistic revenue projections. In May 2009, the payroll tax was projected to bring in $1.54 billion for the MTA, and prior to this amended budget, the MTA was going to receive just $1.3 billion this year. Paterson may be patting himself on the back with Second Ave. Sagas | A New York City Subway Blog. All Rights Reserved.

A look at the Bleecker St. renovations

Benjamin Kabak — Mon, 08 Feb 2010 20:47:45 +0000

For decades, the subway stop at Broadway-Lafayette St./Bleecker St. has been the source of transfer-inspired madness. Due to the oddities of original construction, eventual station expansion and system integration, the complex — the only in-system transfer point in Manhattan between the IND Sixth Ave. line and the Lexington Ave. IRT line — has sported a unidirectional transfer. Passengers can go between the downtown IRT and the IND platforms without exiting but must utilize an out-of-system transfer and an above-ground walk to travel between the uptown IRT and IND platforms.

In 2005, before the days of Second Ave. Sagas, the MTA proposed fixing this annoyance. The plans — which I explored in 2007 — include extending the uptown IRT platform southward by 300 feet so that it will align properly with the downtown platform and IND transfer point. The mezzanine connecting the IRT with the IND will be extended east, and the entire station will be made ADA-compliant. In 2009, as the project got off the ground, I went in depth on the design of the renovated station. These renovations were a long time coming.

Today, as part of its glimpse at weekend work, New York City Transit, via its Twitter account, posted some photographic updates of the work in progress. According to Transit, the $94 million renovation project is 35 percent complete and is still scheduled for a late 2011 completion date.

As for the photos, the shot above shows Transit contractors working to extend the uptown 6 station southward. After the jump, photos and a video of the work in progress. All come courtesy of the MTA and New York City Transit.

Shown here is the steel frame for the uptown platform extension.

At street level, workers are installing the ventilation and roofing infrastructure.

This video from the MTA’s new YouTube account features an overview of the project from those working on it and some more scenes from the construction site.

A video primer on the emergency brake

Benjamin Kabak — Mon, 08 Feb 2010 17:12:26 +0000

Who would have thought that the emergency brake — a fixture of subway cars for decades — could generate such attention? Over the last few weeks, I’ve burned quite a few pixels opining on the problems with the way Transit labels its emergency break. The dialogue started late last month when we explored how, in case of emergency, riders aren’t supposed to pull the brake and continued with a look at how the emergency instructions don’t say when to pull the brake.

In a nutshell, Transit urges its riders to avoid pulling the brake if the police or fire crews are needed. “Do not pull the emergency break,” reads the emergency brake decal. Rather, the emergency brake should be deployed only if a moving subway car has placed someone’s life in danger. That seems to be a rather straightforward instruction that is nowhere to be found in the city’s subway cars. And so in the grand spirit of the internet, a few intrepid filmmakers put forth a homemade PSA about the brake. The five-minute video — available here on Vimeo and embedded below — is quite amusing.

Meanwhile, in his new Off The Rails column at City Room, Michael Grynbaum spoke to the makers of this video who drew their inspiration from a Grynbaum article. Casey Nesitat is a 28-year-old filmmaker who hates riding the subway and spent around $25 on the film. It ends with instructions from the MTA’s website: “Use the emergency brake cord only when the motion of the subway presents an imminent danger to life and limb.” If only the signs in the subway cars were that concise.

Bloomberg: No free rides for anyone

Benjamin Kabak — Mon, 08 Feb 2010 05:47:10 +0000

As the MTA rushes headlong toward economic Armageddon, free rides have become a major political issue. In the face of a lack of political support, the MTA — rightly so — has refused to fund student transit. While the state has pledged some money and the city is trying to find the funds for the Student MetroCard program, the authority is holding students hostage as collateral for the potential of a political rescue.

Yet, as these machinations go ahead behind the scenes, Mayor Bloomberg has called for an end to all free rides. If New York City students can’t have free rides, said, the Mayor, neither should MTA employees. Pete Donohue and Kate Lucadamo of the Daily News had more:

The mayor called into question the policy of giving retired transit workers free bus and subway rides since free and reduced cards for city students are on the chopping block.

“Does it make any sense to give retirees passes for the rest of their lives and not give our kids passes so they can go to school? No,” Bloomberg said during his weekly radio show. “It’s pretty hard to argue that that is an intelligent policy.”

About 20,000 former retired bus, subway and commuter train workers get travel passes for their twilight years as a retirement benefit. Some 585,000 students also have free or discounted MetroCards – but they could lose them because of the MTA’s budget woes.

Bloomberg here is picking on a benefit that has been in the TWU contract for years, and, as expected, union officials are none too pleased. “After years of fiscal irresponsibility by the state government and the MTA, Mayor Bloomberg wants to hang the current fiscal woes around the necks of the elderly, our retirees, and that’s not right,” current TWU head John Samuelsen said.

Of course, if the world were in two shades, this would be a fight in shades of gray. Bloomberg is right in picking on the MTA’s giveaways for retirees, but Samuelsen has a great point too. The city — and state — simply has not lived up to its funding expectations. Fifteen years ago, the city promised to help fund free student rides, and yet, since 1995, the city hasn’t upped its monetary contributions at all. The $45 million the city paid last year is the same $45 million it paid in the mid 1990s.

So what to do? The workers who toil for decades in harsh conditions deserve some benefits after they retire. Do those benefits include free MetroCards along with health insurance and a solid pension plan? That’s not a bad question to ask, but until the city can find more money for student cards, it’s not one Mayor Bloomberg should be asking.

A weekend ‘thank you’ for SAS advertisers

Benjamin Kabak — Fri, 05 Feb 2010 23:13:14 +0000

I’ll get to the service alerts in a minute, but I wanted to take a second to thank those who help bring Second Ave. Sagas to the masses. I run this site mainly as a labor of love and as an outlet for my writing. One day, I’d love to make a living off it, but for now, I do what I can with those interested in advertising. Three of my top site sponsors recently re-upped their ads and deserve a big “thank you.” They are:

I’m always looking for more site sponsors too. So if you’re interested in advertising on Second Ave. Sagas, drop me a line.

Anyway, on to the weekend service changes. All of Transit’s planned weekend work — except for one change — has been canceled due to the snow that, as of nearly 1 a.m. on Friday night, still hasn’t started to fall. For the MTA, the decision to call off the various maintenance projects is a costly one, and if the snow does not, it will have been a losing gamble. The work on the 7 line, though, continues because this project must wrap before baseball season. If it does snow, some lines will run different service patterns. So it’s a good idea to listen to on-board announcements this weekend.

From 11:30 p.m. Friday, February 5 to 5 a.m. Monday, February 8, there are no 7 trains between Times Square-42nd Street and Queensboro Plaza due to track panel installation on the Davis Street curve. The N/Q and free shuttle buses provide alternate service. Note: 42nd Street Shuttle S runs overnight. Q trains are extended to/from Ditmars Blvd.

At Tompkinsville, the first fare-beating charge

Benjamin Kabak — Fri, 05 Feb 2010 20:30:31 +0000

Toward the end of January, the MTA had instituted fare collections at the Staten Island Rail Road’s Tompkinsville, and this week, cops nabbed their first fare-beater at the station. As the Staten Island Advance reported on Tuesday, not only did the cops get their first Tompkinsville fare perp, but the man arrested had an outstanding warrant in Massachusetts. Police say he will most likely be extradited back to the Bay State after he clears up that $100 fine.

At first, I was amused by this story. It’s fairly apt that the first person to get caught evading the new fare control measures was wanted in another state. But then I realized this is a far more common occurrence. Nearly three years ago, I noted how cops often find subway perps have outstanding warrants, and this is a prime example of that phenomenon. I’ve always wondered why people who are on the lam continue to break the law, and here it is again.

DiNapoli: MTA should rein in overtime spending

Benjamin Kabak — Fri, 05 Feb 2010 17:00:25 +0000

According to New York State Comptroller Thomas DiNapoli, the MTA could save significant amounts of money by overhauling its approach to overtime. In a letter sent to the MTA and obtained by the Daily News, DiNapoli said that overtime spending cost the MTA nearly $577 million in 2008. Furthermore, fewer than 5 percent of the authority’s workforce earned 30 percent of the overtime with some LIRR mechanics — the most egregious overtime earners — taking home $200,000 in overtime pay or more than three times their base salaries.

DiNapoli’s letter highlights the need for the MTA to reform its work practices and for its unionized workers to accept that reform. At a time when the authority’s deficit is spiraling out of control, the MTA simply cannot afford to be lax about its overtime regulations. “The high cost of the MTA overtime is a significant issue,” DiNapoli said. The overtime payouts “adds to concerns about whether the MTA has done all that it can to contain costs.”

For his part, MTA CEO and Chairman Jay Walder promised reform. DiNapoli’s study covers the 2008 time period, and Walder has been in the job since only October 2009. Cutting overtime abuse has been one of Walder’s recently talking points, and he reiterated that to the Daily News. “My top priority,” he said, “is finding ways to reduce our costs by targeting areas like overtime and contracting, and we are grateful for any help the controller can provide as we begin to make the MTA more efficient.”

Report: Stimulus dollars for transit remain unspent

Benjamin Kabak — Fri, 05 Feb 2010 06:04:12 +0000

These days, the MTA’s federal stimulus grants have become hot topics of conversation. Some would prefer to use the legally permissible 10 percent siphoned from the stimulus grant to help cover the ever-widening operating deficit. Others don’t feel comfortable taking money away from the also financially distressed capital budget. But what if the money isn’t being spent?

According to a report issued recently by the New York Building Congress, few of the city’s $1.57 billion in transportation stimulus funds have spent. In fact, the city itself has spent only $857,000 of that money, and while the MTA has spent more of its allotted dollars, spending is far off pace. Of the MTA, the NYBC said:

According to the State Comptroller’s figures, the MTA has spent $39,000 of stimulus funds on a bridge replacement on South First Avenue over the MetroNorth Railroad. Approximately $10.9 million is earmarked for this project.

At the end of 2009, no federal stimulus money had been spent on the two MTA projects slated to receive the most ARRA funds; the Fulton Street Transit Center, which is expected to receive $423 million, and the Second Avenue Subway, which has been approved for $276 million.

According to MTA, the agency has been allocated a total of $1.075 billion in ARRA funds and has awarded contracts worth $886 million. However, the MTA acknowledges that just $14 million has been spent to date.

This data underscores a point I’ve made about the stimulus grants in the first place. Generally, shovel-ready projects were mostly funded, and the MTA — along with many other state organizations — used its stimulus dollars to cover project deficits. NYBC’s head echoed this sentiment.

“As New York City nears the first anniversary of federal stimulus legislation, we remain greatly concerned about the slow pace of capital spending on transportation projects,” NYBC President Richard T. Anderson said. “Virtually all of the stimulus money spent and received to date has been devoted to programs designed to lessen the impact of the economic downturn on individuals, bolster the operating budgets of local governments, or fund small-scale construction projects. While such spending is important, it does little to stimulate the broader economy, create new jobs and prepare the region for renewed growth.”

So what is to be done? If anything, this latest development strengthens the case for the Russianoff Plan. Congress passed the stimulus money in order to stimulate the economy, and an operating budget crisis at the MTA will lead to job losses that we as a city would prefer to avoid. If those federal dollars can be used to avert some cuts and some staff reductions, then, the money would be going to good use. Of course, some of the payroll fat at the MTA deserves to be cut, and some of the efficiency-based service changes should be implemented anyway. As of now, though, this money is just sitting there.

I’m still not on board with the Russianoff Plan, but I can see where this debate is leading. Eventually, the MTA, faced with a huge debt and a pile of unused cash just sitting there, will take some of the stimulus funds from projects that, in a few years, will need more money. The economics of it all just keep getting more and more muddled as time goes on.

On Long Island’s East End, a move toward secession

Benjamin Kabak — Thu, 04 Feb 2010 21:53:48 +0000

The good folks out on the eastern end of the northern fork of Long Island aren’t too happy. Their estimated contributions to the MTA run to approximately $60 million a year, and the service offerings are sparse out to Greenport, to say the least. In its service cut plans, in fact, the LIRR plans to end all but some weekend train service between Ronkonkoma and Greenport in order to save nearly $1 million a year. While only 160 passengers per weekday and 190 over the entire weekend would suffer, Long Island pols are not happy.

Can you blame for it? Their constituents pay a reasonable amount of money and get very little train service. To solve this problem, the rumblings of secession are growing louder. East End pols are talking about establishing a local transit authority and taking over control of the Greenport Branch from the MTA. A recent study concluded that the trains could be operated on a more local level for approximately $45 million or a good 25 percent less than what East Enders pay to the MTA now. The MTA would be absolved of operating these trains, and the East End Long Islanders would be shelling out fewer bucks. That sounds like a win-win transit situation to me.