Late last week, New York Magazine’s Sam Jewler and I exchanged a few e-mails about the history of the Second Ave. Subway. What emerged was this very thorough timeline designed to complement the timeline on my site. As you can see, it is a rather dubious timeline, filled with stops and starts. When the Second Ave. Subway was first announced in 1929, it was due for a completion between 1938 and 1941. Here we are, 80 years later, still waiting for a subway whose completion date keeps drifting further and further into the future.
The swaying Manhattan Bridge
For nearly twenty years between the 1980s and the early 2000s, various sides of the Manhattan Bridge were closed to train traffic. While I take my Q and B trips over the bridge for granted, Brooklyn residents know the pain of a closed bridge. What many do not realize is why the bridge was closed.
When the Manhattan Bridge was first built, it contained a huge engineering flaw. Because the four subway tracks — two on the south side and two on the north — were built on the outside of the bridge as opposed to the center, the bridge would sway as the heavy trains drove back and forth between Brooklyn and Manhattan. As trains — and people — grew heavier, so did the stress on the bridge.
In the early 1980s, as New York City Transit was busy restoring its degraded system to a state of good repair, an examination of the Manhattan Bridge revealed some serious structural damage. In 1985, the north tracks were shuttered for three years. In 1988 through the summer of 2001, the south tracks were closed. From 2001 through early 2004, the north tracks were closed again. Finally, in February 2004, nearly two decades after repairs started the bridge reopened.
We are still feeling the effects of this design flaw. Every few months, the MTA closes the bridge to train traffic and examines the structural integrity of the nearly 100-year-old bridge. The above video underscores the problem. It is a stop-motion video shot from the Brooklyn side of the bridge, and it underscores just how much the bridge sways as trains go across it.
So the next time you find yourself on a B or Q making the scenic trip across the East River, don’t think too much about the bridge beneath. You might find yourself swaying along with it.
When it was a train: The Grand St. shuttle
At the end of May, a loyal Second Ave. Sagas reader sent me a picture of the 13 train. The photo was one of an erroneously rolled roll sign on the 1 train. The 13, we discovered, was there to provide the MTA with some flexibility in terms of service along the West Side IRT (1/2/3 trains).
Over the last few weeks, I’ve received pictures of a few other incorrectly labeled trains. This one comes to us via reader Mark Krotov. While at the Broadway/Lafayette station a few weeks ago, Mark witnessed a rare spotting of the once-common orange shuttle.
Today, the Grand St. shuttle is but a memory for New Yorkers, but for long stretches of time in the 1980s and 1990s, the B and D were disrupted due to extensive work on the Manhattan Bridge. At various times the shuttle ran from as far north as 57th St. along Sixth Ave. to Grand St. in Chinatown. The final shuttles rolled down the line in 2004 after being in service for parts of the mid-1980s, the mid-1990s and the early 2000s.
The Manhattan Bridge, with the train tracks on the outside, required extensive repair work, and the shuttle would come to symbolize the frustration of traveling into and out of Brooklyn and around Lower Manhattan. With work completed, for now, on the bridge, the parts of Brooklyn along the BMT Brighton Line (B/Q) have seen a population explosion, and the orange Grand St./Sixth Ave. Shuttle is but a memory in the minds of the straphanging public.
Praising the G train Church Ave. extension
The better part of recent coverage of the G train has not been favorable. The line is often termed the Ghost train, and riders along the IND Crosstown Line, the only major subway route to skirt Manhattan, are used to long waits for small trains. It is the neglected stepchild of New York City Transit. At the start of July, due to work on the Culver Viaduct, the MTA extended the G train to Church Ave. in the heart of Kensington, Brooklyn. All of a sudden, as Bobby Allyn reported for City Room last week, everyone loves the G train. It’s the one-seat ride from Long Island City to Park Slope and beyond. Who could complain?
While it’s easy to dismiss this news as the afterglow of a new marriage, there is something to this latest news. For the next four years, the G train will be running to Church Ave. because Transit has no choice. It’s the only place at which the train can turn around. But if the demand is there, if the ridership is there, Transit will consider making this change a permanent one. Both Brooklyn and Queens would benefit from added G service.
Is there a Transit healthcare problem?
We spent much of last week concerned about the most recent round of Second Ave. Subway delays, and in doing so, a potentially explosive story concerning New York City Transit slipped through the tracks. According to a report in the Daily News last week, Transit took a $1 million hit and jeopardized a strong position vis-a-vis its labor relations when it allowed potential worker health care contributions to lapse.
Pete Donohue broke the story last week:
The transit workers contract reached after the December 2005 bus and subway strike allowed management for the first time to make paycheck deductions to help defray soaring expenses. The rate – 1.5% of earnings – went into effect retroactively for 2006. It could be increased annually and was bumped up to 1.53% for 2007.
While health care expenses continued to escalate for the agency, NYC Transit managers opted not to hike the contribution rate for 2008. Instead, transit brass agreed with Transport Workers Union Local 100’s interpretation of the contract on how to determine if contributions should be increased or kept flat.
The decision has raised eyebrows inside and outside the Metropolitan Transportation Authority. Interim MTA Chief Executive Officer Helena Williams was concerned last month after learning NYC Transit, the main subway and bus division, didn’t increase the contribution rate, a statement released by MTA spokesman Jeremy Soffin said. Williams asked the MTA auditor to do a “full review.”
“Ballooning health care costs are putting enormous pressure on the MTA’s budget, and escalating employee contributions are critical to defraying these costs,” Williams said.
According to union leaders, Transit officials were concerned that they would lose on the issue in arbitration. With relations between the union and the MTA so tenuous as late, Transit reportedly did not want to risk pushing the issue.
The next day, former MTA Chair Peter Kalikow expressed his outrage over the news. “What did we go through a strike for?” he said to Donohue. “So we could give it back to them? It’s outrageous.”
On Friday, the Daily News editorial board called Transit President Howard Roberts a subway sellout. “He must be held accountable,” they wrote while Kalikow chimed in with his own op-ed. He called it a “shady deal” and claimed that the union “has wormed its way out of paying anything for health care.”
I’m not so sure I can get that worked up about this announcement. Roberts’ decision will probably cost the MTA around $1 million and may cost them up to $4 million, if everything goes wrong. Meanwhile, any improvement in labor relations could save the MTA far more than that.
As I’ve written about this year, the MTA has some serious labor problems. They are beholden to a very generous pension plan with escalating costs threatening to get out of hand. This health care story is hardly worth the trouble. Maybe another contractual interpretation would have bolstered the MTA’s position, but maybe it wouldn’t have. Perhaps I don’t see why ex-MTA officials are so up in arms, and as interim MTA head Helena Williams looks into this issue, I doubt she’ll find much.
Service changes: some for the weekend and others longer
We start off our weekly jaunt through the service advisories with a news stories about a semi-permanent service change along my subway line — the B — in Brooklyn.
A long time ago, back in December of 2007, I warned of the MTA’s plans to renovate seven stations along the BMT Brighton Line. At the time, the MTA unveiled timelines and the corresponding service changes for only the Ave. U and Neck Road rehabs.
Now, we find out that the other five stations in line for overhauls will see their projects start in September. As such, the B will no longer run express through Brooklyn. Heather Haddon reports:
Express service on the B line will be eliminated north of King Highway for two years beginning September in order for the MTA to work on overhauling five stations that have been neglected for decades, transit officials said. Local trains will run on express tracks but will not skip the six stops the express currently bypasses.
Running the trains local will add up to seven minutes to straphangers’ commutes and cost the MTA $960,000 for the additional local service, according to transit documents. “It’s never a good time for this,” said Doris Ortiz, district manager for Community Board 14 in Brooklyn. “It’s an inconvenience, but it’s worth it.”
The Avenue H and Avenue M stations also will be closed on alternating sides during the two years, and riders will have to take shuttle buses on weekends during part of the work.
Since I get on at Seventh Ave., I won’t be too impacted by the change. My B train in the morning can’t really be more crowded than it already is. For those who rely on the B for a speedy ride home though, this is dismaying news.
Now, onto the weekend changes. As always, these are coming to us from the MTA and are subject to change without notice. Pay attention to the signs in the stations as you travel and be sure to listen for on-board announcements.
From 11:30 p.m. Friday, July 24 to 5 a.m. Monday, July 27, there are no 2/4 trains at Bergen Street, Grand Army Plaza, and Eastern Parkway due to switch work near Eastern Parkway. Free shuttle buses provide alternate service. Customers may transfer between the shuttle bus and 2/3/4 trains at Atlantic Avenue or Franklin Avenue.
From 12:01 a.m. Saturday, July 25 to 5 a.m. Monday, July 27, Manhattan-bound 2 trains run express from Gun Hill Road 2 to East 180th Street due to structural steel repairs between East 180th Street and Dyre Avenue.
From 12:01 a.m. Saturday, July 25 to 5 a.m. Monday, July 27, uptown 4 trains run express from Brooklyn Bridge to 14th Street due to construction of the Broadway-Lafayette Street to Bleecker Street transfer.
From 12:01 a.m. Saturday, July 25 to 5 a.m. Monday, July 27, the last stop for some Brooklyn-bound 4 trains is Bowling Green due to structural steel repairs between East 180th Street and Dyre Avenue.
From 11:30 p.m. Friday, July 24 to 5 a.m. Monday, July 27, there are no 5 trains running due to structural steel repairs between East 180th Street and Dyre Avenue. The 2/4 and free shuttle buses provide alternate service.
From 12:01 a.m. Saturday, July 25 to 5 a.m. Monday, July 27, uptown 6 trains run express from Brooklyn Bridge to 14th Street due to construction of the Broadway-Lafayette Street to Bleecker Street transfer.
From 12:01 a.m. Saturday, July 25 to 5 a.m. Monday, July 27, Manhattan-bound 6 trains run express from Hunts Point Avenue to 3rd Avenue due to platform edge rehabilitation at Cypress Avenue, East 143rd Street, East 149th Street and Longwood Avenue stations.
From 4 a.m. to 10 p.m. Saturday, July 25 and from 1 p.m. to 10 p.m. Sunday, July 26, Manhattan-bound 7 trains skip 111th, 103rd, 90th, and 82nd Streets due to station painting at Junction Boulevard.
From 5 a.m. to 12 noon, Sunday, July 26, there are no 7 trains between Times Square and Queensboro Plaza due to rail replacement at 45th Road-Court House Square. The N and free shuttle buses provide alternate service.
From 12:01 a.m. Saturday, July 25 to 5 a.m. Monday, July 27, there is no C service due to Jay Street station rehabilitation and construction of the underground connector. A trains replace the C making local stops between 168th Street and Jay Street and F trains replace the C between Jay Street and Euclid Avenue.
From 12:01 a.m. Saturday, July 25 to 5 a.m. Monday, July 27, Brooklyn-bound D trains skip DeKalb Avenue and run express from Pacific Street to 36th Street due to track chip-out at DeKalb Avenue.
From 11:30 p.m. Friday, July 24 to 5 a.m. Monday, July 27, Manhattan-bound E/F trains run local from Forest Hills-71st Avenue to Jackson Heights-Roosevelt Avenue due to track and roadbed replacement at Grand Avenue.
From 12:30 a.m. Saturday, July 25 to 5 a.m. Monday, July 27, Jamaica-bound E/F trains run local from Jackson Heights-Roosevelt Avenue to Forest Hills-71st Avenue due to track and roadbed replacement at Grand Avenue.
From 12:01 a.m. Saturday, July 25 to 5 a.m. Monday, July 27, F trains run between Jamaica-179th Street and the Euclid Avenue C station. G trains replace the F between Hoyt-Schermerhorn Sts. and Coney Island-Stillwell Avenue due to Jay Street station rehabilitation and construction of the underground connector. (From 12:01 a.m. Saturday, July 25 to 5 a.m. Monday, July 27, G trains are extended to the Coney Island-Stillwell Avenue F station.)
From 12:01 a.m. Saturday, July 25 to 5 a.m. Monday, July 27, there is no G train service between Forest Hills-71st Avenue and Court Square. Customers should take the E or R instead.
From 4:30 a.m. Saturday, July 25 to 10 p.m. Sunday, July 26, there are no L trains between Broadway Junction and Rockaway Parkway due to switch renewal north of Atlantic Avenue. Free shuttle buses provide alternate service.
From 12:01 a.m. Saturday, July 25 to 5 a.m. Monday, July 27, Brooklyn-bound N/Q trains run on the R line from Canal Street to DeKalb Avenue due to a track chip-out at DeKalb Avenue.
From 12:01 a.m. Saturday, July 25 to 5 a.m. Monday, July 27, N trains run local between 59th Street-4th Avenue and Pacific Street due to a track chip-out at DeKalb Avenue station.
From 12:01 a.m. Saturday, July 25 to 5 a.m. Monday, July 27, Coney Island-bound Q trains skip Newkirk Avenue due to station rehabilitation.
From 12:01 a.m. Saturday, July 25 to 5 a.m. Monday, July 27, Coney Island-bound Q trains run express from Prospect Park to Kings Highway due to Brighton Line station rehabilitation.
Wanted: A few good bloggers
I’m going to be out of the country starting on Monday, July 27 returning on Friday, August 7, and while I am away, I will limited access to the Internet. I have a guest blogger lined up for the end of next week, but I am currently looking for some guest contributors for the week of August 3. If anyone is looking to share their news and views on transportation in New York City and the subways, please contact me or leave a comment here with a valid e-mail address in the e-mail field. Anything help would be greatly appreciated.
Bus drivers still waiting for safety measures
Seven months ago, bus driver Edwin Thomas was murdered when he refused to give a free transfer to someone who had paid his fare. At the time, the MTA promised increased safety measures for very vulnerable bus drivers. Yet, as Heather Haddon detailed in amNew York earlier this week, those measures have yet to arrive.
Writes Haddon:
Nearly 180 bus drivers were injured between July 2008 and June 2009, almost double the previous year, according to the union’s data. But figuring out a fix hasn’t proved so easy, leaving drivers at risk and causing delays for passengers when an incident forces a bus out of service.
NYC Transit experimented with partitions on buses running in Brooklyn earlier this year, but drivers said they caused glare from sun reflecting into the mirrors, Watt said.
Transit hopes to move ahead with the partitions but has not determined a final design, said spokesman Charles Seaton. Officials did not provide a timetable.
Bus systems in Los Angeles, Chicago and Washington, D.C. have already installed plastic partitions to protect drivers where they sit and have received mixed reviews. Los Angeles bus officials said drivers found the partitions confining and hot. “We should expect some level of protection,” said Israel Rivera, a Bronx bus driver and union activist. “We come to work and wait to be assaulted again.”
And so the drivers wait. They wait for something bad to happen, and they wait for the proper protective measures. What will come first?
Could BRT replace the Second Ave. Subway?
As this week of bad news for the Second Ave. Subway draws to a close, we return again to a question of transit on the Upper East Side? As they do every time another SAS delay is announced, Streetsblog advocated for a BRT solution to the Second Ave. problem. But is that a realistic replacement for a full Second Ave. subway?
In rehashing their BRT argument for Second Ave. — one they explored in February — Ben Fried and Streetsblog made a rather bold claim. “On the east side of Manhattan,” Fried writes, “the right BRT configuration would carry almost as many commuters as the Second Avenue Subway, for a fraction of the cost.”
The Overhead Wire jumped all over this one. Pantograph Trolleypole, the pseudonymous author of TOW, did not believe this Streetsblog claim to be an accurate statement. While calling the BRT option “inferior transit,” the Wire levels this charge:
For a fraction of the cost you get a fraction of the ridership and a fraction of the service. How many buses and how many Union wages would it take to get that level of service? Let’s all imagine how much it would cost operationally to carry ~7 million daily subway riders on buses every day in addition to the 2.3 million people that already ride buses in New York. Let’s see what kind of a city New York would be without the Subway. There is a specific crowding issue that needs to be addressed on the east side and if you amortize that $5 billion over the lifetime of the tunnels it is well worth the investment over centuries of use.
Forgetting the seven million figure, let’s look at some real numbers. According to the Second Ave. Subway environmental impact statement, the MTA estimates that 200,000 riders a day will use just Phase I of the new line. When — or if — the whole line is completed, the MTA believes that 500,000 a day will rely on some part of the Second Ave. Subway. Some of those will be new riders while others will be eschewing the overcrowded Lexington Ave. line for an emptier, more convenient train.
Let’s assume that, for a bus-rapid transit lane on Second Ave., the MTA uses the current high-capacity ride in its fleet. The articulated buses can fit 145 passengers. To meet the demand of just 200,000 passengers, the MTA would have to run around 58 buses per hour for 24 hours. Simply put, that’s impossible. To cover even half of the projected 200,000 for Phase I, the MTA would have to run a bus every two minutes throughout the day. We can’t even consider meeting the 500,000 projected number for a full line.
In the end, bus-rapid transit along Second Ave. probably should be implemented but not as a replacement for a subway. It should be implemented because it will cut down on the space available to cars and eliminate drivers while encouraging mass transit. It will provide an area of the city not too near a subway with a better option than the 4/5/6. But as the numbers show, BRT cannot replace a subway line. It can’t meet the demand, and it can’t do what the MTA wants the Second Ave. Subway to do.
As the city grows and the current subway system reaches capacity, we need to add transit options that allow for this expansion. While far more expensive, a subway can service more people than BRT. That’s what we need along Second Ave.
A transit terror threat, revealed
While we’ve been busy covering the wall-to-wall news concerning the delayed Second Ave. Subway, another important transit story has cropped up as well. As The Times detailed today, a Long Island native who joined Al Qaeada last year supplied sensitive transit information to the terrorist network.
He also told Brooklyn federal prosecutors and F.B.I. agents about discussions he had with operational planners from Al Qaeda about a plot to blow up a Long Island Rail Road train inside Pennsylvania Station, according to several law enforcement officials.
The information prompted a flurry of security activity over the Thanksgiving holiday as the authorities scrambled to take extra precautions, though it did not appear the planned attack had yet been put into motion.
The slight, dark-haired and pale-skinned Mr. Vinas, who the officials said began formally cooperating with federal authorities about two months later, also admitted assisting Al Qaeda by providing ?expert advice and assistance? that was ?derived from specialized knowledge of the New York transit system and the Long Island Rail Road,? according to the court papers.
Two officials said that Mr. Vinas, who lived in Patchogue until he went to Pakistan, learned about the Long Island Rail Road as a regular rider and shared that information with Qaeda leaders in Pakistan, who had planned to use it in an attack. But neither official would provide specifics, and it appeared that Mr. Vinas?s knowledge of details of the planned attack may have been limited. The officials, like others interviewed for this article, spoke on the condition of anonymity because the investigation is continuing.
In the end, thankfully, nothing happened during the Thanksgiving period, and the FBI says everything is under control. This revelation though returns the spotlight to the oft-ignored issue of the security of our transit infrastructure.
For their part, the MTA, part of the Joint Terrorism Task Force, acknowledged being in ” in constant communication with local and federal authorities as the investigation involving Bryant Neal Vinas developed,” according to a statement released earlier this week. “There was never an imminent threat to the system,” said the agency. “The security of our entire transportation network and the safety of our customers continue to be the MTA’s top priorities.”
No one is sure how Vinas, never an employee of the MTA or its vendors, received his information, and The Times and other news outlets did not reveal the nature or extent of the information revealed. The Daily News claims that Vinas provided information on New York City Transit as well but knew nothing more than any other commuter.
While we bemoan a lack of closed-circuit cameras and the porous nature of the subway system, the threat out there can be very real, and law information officials are working to guard our infrastructure. That, by itself, is far more comforting than random bag searches, constant “important messages from the NYPD” and the ever-ubiquitous “If you see something, say something” campaign.