On June 27, the MTA will implement a sweeping array of service cuts that will change the way New Yorkers travel around the city, and The Post today explores the numbers and changes to signage that must go into effect prior to that day. Says Tom Namako, Transit will be eliminating 611 bus stops throughout the five boroughs, and the agency will have to replace 8600 Guide-A-Ride maps at the remaining bus stops.
Underground, as the Q heads to Astoria, the V and W meet their makers, the M travels along Queens Boulevard, and the G gets scaled back – the last being a permanent change that happens tonight – Transit will have to change approximately 2750 signs at 154 stations. The subway map, too, will change with the callout boxes highlighting new bus routes and the M’s turning 6th Ave. orange. While the signage will begin to change three weeks before the cuts arrive, Transit spokesman Paul Fleuranges assured me that the new map will be in stations on that fateful Monday in June. As numerous bus stops will soon sit unused, I wonder if the MTA will ever be able or willing to restore these cut services when their fiscal picture improves.
27 comments
Wow, that’s an incredible number of signs. Any idea what happens to them and the maps? What about cost? Spend money to save money, I suppose. Does the MTA document these changes, like the sign and map making? I’d love to see that process up close, take some photos, creating an historical document has the map and stations all know will be changing.
Well… something’s going to happen on the Broadway line once second avenue subway’s built. The Q can’t be in Astoria AND the Upper East Side, after all.
Heh, good point. That’s assuming the SAS (Phase I) gets completed, of course. Maybe the MTA knows something we don’t.
As a map nut, I’m looking forward to seeing the new maps – especially where I live in Bay Ridge where it’s a complete re-write of the bus lines. I wonder if they update the neighborhood maps, too…?
Remember that the current process of launching the TBM means that Phase 1 is past the point of no return.
I would assume that when the Q is finally running under Second Ave., Astoria will have only the N. After all, for a long time it had only the R, previously called the RR.
You guys are all making assumptions about something that’s not going to happen for at least six years. The MTA has, in the past, increased service as the economics have allowed them to, and by 2016, I hope the authority has enough to both reroute the Q to Second Ave., as it will, and revive the W. Stranger things have happened.
Yah, Astoria doesn’t necessarily require two lines. When I lived there it was only the N. Of course that was one Manhattan bridge reconstruction ago and maybe that configuration isn’t feasible anymore.
Anyway I’m just being cheeky about the completion of Phase I. It does seem a done deal – unless things get really bad.
Astoria ridership has grown to the point that the N alone won’t cut it. Unless Astoria experiences massive depopulation, the W, or something like it, will have to return. And given the track layout at 57th St., SAS will have to be served by one of the bridge trains (either the N or the Q) – not the W.
I lived there from ’97 to ’05 or so… now that you mention it, you’re right about the population increase. Old singles and duplexes in my old somewhat downscale neighborhood were turning into Fedders Specials and even huge apartment houses left and right — and without exception, they are supplied with plentiful parking. But I doubt the newcomers are driving to work in Midtown, so yeah the ridership has definitely increased there. At least on weekdays.
Curiously enough, my new neighborhood (Bay Ridge) is the exact opposite. There’s special zoning rules here that are opposed to the exact things that are going on in Astoria. For example, the avenues maintain a six-story character with shops on the first floor while the side streets retain the 3-story flats or duplexes. Some old mansions have been replaced with Fedders Specials, but nowhere near to the extent in Astoria. I have to admit that the character of the neighborhood is what keeps me here, but at the same time I’m a little uncomfortable with that sort of zoning, because it strikes me as somewhat snobbish. And eventually it will raise rents….
Astoria had two services for half the time you were living there – the W started running in 2001.
Personally, I hold the practice of zoning as we know it to be largely responsible for high rents in general. Of course, homeowners benefit from inflated housing costs, so I’m not holding my breath on zoning reform. But that’s a different discussion.
The main question isn’t about the number of lines, but about the tph count. The current count is 14 – 6 on the W, 8 on the N. The crowding levels on the 60th Street crossings are such that a large service cut is not feasible. But a single service running 14 tph would do.
The real reason for the W is not that Astoria needs trains with two different names. It’s that the travel demand is much higher at the Astoria end of the Broadway BMT than at the Southern Brooklyn end. If every train from Astoria went south to Brooklyn, the trains on the Sea Beach Line would be even emptier than they are today.
So the Astoria service change is not really a cut; it’s a rationalization. Instead of having the W short-turn in Lower Manhattan and the Q in Midtown, the MTA is consolidating routes to one service. The only service cut is on the trunk line.
While I often criticize the MTA for being incompetent, none of the organizational problems causing mismanagement applies to this case. A railfan may suffer from the not-invented-here syndrome and think New York has nothing to learn from the rest of the world, and yet be competent at designing the least painful service cuts possible. Professionals are quite good at circumscribed problems like this.
You’re right, but that doesn’t answer the question of what happens when SAS opens. The plan had been for the Q to be extended from 57th St. up to 96th and 2nd – but obviously that can’t happen while the Q is also going to Astoria.
So unless Sea Beach ridership skyrockets to the point of matching Astoria ridership (and there’s enough capacity on 4th Avenue and over the Manhattan Bridge to handle a 14 tph N, which there probably isn’t without cutting the D and Q), a fourth Broadway service is going to have to come back.
Obviously, once the Q runs on SAS, things will change dramatically, which may force a return of the W. (Or maybe not – the loss of the M’s 6 tph coming from the Montague Street Tunnel may change things.)
The Manhattan Bridge has enough capacity. The N shares tracks with the Q there, which runs 10 tph; it can run 14 tph. The real question is whether it should, in light of the low demand on the Southern Division.
I doubt the old M will ever return. If the current second service to Bay Parkway is ever to return, it will probably be in the form of the W. (I expect that the new M will be very popular.)
From the south, the N, Q, B, and D each run 10 tph. I doubt DeKalb interlocking can reliably handle 14 tph on the N diverging from 10 tph on the Q and merging with 10 tph on the D. And 6 tph isn’t enough for the D or the Q. If the W isn’t coming back, then the D may need even more service, to replace the now-M. Seems like the simplest way to handle it is to run 6 tph from Bay Parkway to Astoria via the tunnel – and to call that service the W.
Yeah, it’s likely that commencement of service along 2nd Av will require restoration of the W (or whatever they choose to call it come 2016, they may be directing some other service to Astoria by then). Hell, they could also choose to leave the Q in Astoria and run a nascent T from the UES to Coney Island via the Broadway BMT and Prospect Park, it’s all the same thing. It’d be the same service as described today but with different lettering, depending on how the odds look for Phases III-IV. But I doubt they would eviscerate Astoria service once SAS starts revenue operation.
Will the R be getting all the nice W train cars? I only seen a few newer cars on the R line, while all of the W cars are new.
It probably depends on where the yards are, but I suspect MTA will be using the service cuts to accelerate phase-out of the older cars – if they’re running fewer trains they’re probably going to be running the newer cars, not the older ones. (assuming that budget issues haven’t curtailed rolling stock acquisition, and I don’t have the answer to that question).
(assuming that budget issues haven’t curtailed rolling stock acquisition, and I don’t have the answer to that question).
New cars are part of the capital budget, and most of the contracts have been executed. We’re still waiting on a resubmitted 2010-2014 capital plan though.
Ah, thank you :).
The R-160 contract is almost complete. Based on the original plan (to retire the R-32 through R-42), the last of the old cars would be on their way out within the next few months, even without the service cuts.
But the new plan (see my other comment) changes everything, and presumably relies on the service cuts, since 290(?) 60-foot cars (the remaining R-32s and R-42s) aren’t otherwise enough to retire 272 75-foot cars (the R-44s).
The next B division car order is the R-179, and that contract hasn’t been executed. It could well be a victim of cuts to the capital budget. (R-32 fans rejoice!)
I doubt you’ll be seeing many on the R – the Q is going to need most of the cars that now run on the W, since it’s being extended to Astoria, and the W and Q are both based out of the same maintenance shop (Coney Island), unlike the R (Jamaica).
Complicating matters is the recent decision to retire the R-44s instead of the last of the R-32s and R-42s. Presumably most of the R-46s that won’t be needed on the V anymore will be going to the A to replace its R-44s. I don’t know how the numbers work out, but Coney Island may have to send a few R-160s to Jamaica in order to free up some of the R-46s off the F and R (to be sent on to Pitkin for the A). On the flip side, you may see a return of the R-32 to the R in limited quantities (since most of the R-32s are needed on the C). It’s probably safe to assume that the R-42s on the J/Z will stay right where they are; the remaining 4-car R-160s will presumably be all needed on the M.
Ugh, I am wary of the R32’s for the same reason as the R160’s – fewer seats. But yeah they completely vanished from the R a few months ago. I ride the C a lot lately and I almost feel homesick for the darn things – except for the foul, baked-in stench.
The new R160s started appearing regularly on the R couple weeks ago – which was a total surprise. I heard it was a “test” and the new cars will go back to other lines after a few more weeks. I was excited at first, because I like the smoother ride and the clear announcements, but… then I realized that there are far fewer seats. I commute on the R local from Bay Ridge to Wall Street. Lately I’ve had to stand the whole way 🙁
Yeah it’s purely selfish but on the old cars I always get a seat. I don’t mind standing on express trains but on locals it’s a real pain to stand for 14 or 15 stops.
I’ve been a real fan of the R46s (the ones with the “conversation seating”) for a while now. I always grab a window seat because nobody else wants to sit there. Now I’m an even bigger fan o_O.
You say that the G is a permanent change as of this week – why does mta.info still consider it a long-term service change and still has the G going to Forest Hills part-time? Are they hoping to stave off this change or is there an administrative law reason for this?
The cuts go into effect at 12:00 a.m. on Sun., June 27. So it’s just an administrative technicality. They don’t want to change the signs and reissue maps now and then spend the money and effort to do it again in eight weeks.
Ahh, that makes sense. I was thinking that they could at least change the website’s map but I suppose they want the website’s maps to match those found within the stations.
It’s a bit more than an administrative technicality. I’ll explain.
The internal schedules that the train crews select (“pick”) their jobs from change on June 27. Crews on the G still have jobs that operate to Forest Hills at night and on weekends.
A “General Order” (GO) is a document that spells out some sort of temporary modification to the way things operate – e.g., a track outage, or a slow speed order, or a route modification, or, most often, some combination of the above. If there’s an impact on the schedule – where the train runs or how long it takes to get there – the GO also specifies a “supplement schedule,” which overrides the regular schedule and indicates which crews are supposed to go where.
So – through June 26, the G still officially runs to Forest Hills nights and weekends, but a GO (or a series of GO’s) cuts it back to Court Square. A supplement schedule (or a series of supplement schedules) supersedes the regular schedule.
What difference does it make?
Well, for one thing, GO’s are sometimes canceled, for a variety of reasons. If this particular GO is canceled one night, then the G will run to Forest Hills (unless it’s replaced by another GO that cuts the G right back).
Of lesser direct interest to the public, this also means that crews are still being paid to operate the full G route. Obviously, more crews are needed for the full G than for the cut-back G, so some crews who picked the G are being paid to do something other than operate the G. What are they doing? I don’t know if there’s a consistent answer. If other GO’s increase crew requirements elsewhere in the system, then the G crews may work those other lines. Otherwise, they probably don’t do much. Another inefficiency in the process is that crews who picked jobs out of Forest Hills, who are actually operating trains out of Court Square, get to travel from Forest Hills to Court Square on the clock. I wouldn’t be surprised if crews end up being paid more to provide less service – some are being paid their regular salaries to do nothing, while others pick up a bit of overtime because their supplement-based jobs are for more hours than their picked jobs. This explains why the MTA has been so eager to officially shorten the night/weekend G, which is cut back to Court Square so often. (In fact, that’s exactly why the MTA didn’t want to run it in the first place, back in 2001!)
[…] To make sure the system is telling people where to go, New York City Transit will have to change approximately 2750 signs at 154 stations. We know how the bus stops are being phased out, but what of the signs […]