I’ve been mulling over the Straphangers’ report on the state of platforms during the past few days, and one thing in particular has jumped out at me. The MTA’s reaction seemed to flippant, and it’s bothered me.
“The items in the Straphangers report highlight elements that would be extremely costly to keep in perfect condition and would do little, if anything, to either improve service or make stations safer. We have to prioritize projects using available funds to address the most pressing needs first.”
Now, I don’t begrudge or envy the MTA the choices it has to make, and when push comes to shove, I’d rather have trains running regularly with the knowledge that the signal system won’t fail rather than luxury stations. But on the other hand, I question the belief that well-maintained stations would do “little, if anything, to…improve service.” Well-maintained stations may not make trains run more frequently or faster, but the overall experience would certainly be enhanced if stations weren’t, as the Straphangers put it, “grim” and “dirty.”
While musing on this topic over the weekend, I found myself running errands in Midtown, and my route home took me through the Herald Square subway station. After surveying the scene and spending a few minutes waiting for my Brooklyn-bound Q, I wondered if this station is one of the worst in the system. This is the third-busiest subway station in the city with over 37 million riders passing through the turnstiles last year. Just one block away from Penn Station, it is a main transfer point between the Sixth Ave. and Broadway lines, provides a connection to PATH and hosts millions of Macys-bound shoppers every year. It should be a nice station, but it’s not.
Renovated in the 1970s and updated again in the 1990s, the station is not in particularly great shape. Low ceilings create a cramped atmosphere, but that’s not a solvable problem. That the ceilings are dirty, that trash piles abound, that water damage mars support columns and station walls, that a not-insignificant number of homeless people count that station as a semi-permanent residence, that it generally just feels unkempt — those are solvable problems.
By presenting Herald Square as it is, the MTA gives off a dismissive aura regarding station environment, and if Herald Square is a dump, imagine how some stations along the Sea Beach line that barely crack a few thousand riders per weekday look. The image is one of neglect, and if people view their surroundings and see neglect, they are less likely to feel comfortable or at home. Rather, they are more likely to be just as dismissive, whether it’s with their trash or their willingness to embrace transit as a viable transportation alternative. It’s a lesser version of the “broken windows” theory and one focused around aesthetics and environmental cues.
So what’s the solution? I realize that the MTA’s money is limited, and I realize the challenges they face in keeping stations clean and well-maintained. It’s a Sisyphean task that requires patience and dollars, lacking on the part of New Yorkers and the MTA respectively. But the MTA need not dismiss station presentation so out of hand. It’s a problem in New York and one that isn’t replicated in similar subway stations. London and Paris, for instance, have figured out a solution, and maybe it’s time for the agency in charge to figure out a way to prioritize some modicum of station presentation so this isn’t a common sight.
59 comments
Well-said; my sentiments exactly. Examining ridership figures for stations that recently underwent renovations (and noting the upward tick in ridership) suggests that appearance (as well as utility, especially when MTA reopens long-closed exits) does matter. The increased ridership should partly offset the cost of renovation.
OTOH, deteriorated platforms could discourage ridership (but I think service levels have more to do with ridership growth/decay than appearance)…
This is right on the money, Ben. The MTA also needs to realize that the crappy state of the stations makes New Yorkers despise and disrespect the MTA itself. The piles of trash, the water-damaged walls, the disgusting platforms — this is our daily experience of the MTA. This is their public face to New Yorkers.
What’s the solution? How about this: Instead of MTA employees sitting inside of bullet proof glass boxes doing, for the most part, nothing, are asked to clean up and take care of the stations instead.
I suspect the TWU is part of the problem here. The funds and the labor are there but station maintenance is difficult, crappy work. So it doesn’t get done.
Another idea: Give me a mechanism by which I can organize people in my neighborhood to do maintenance of my local subway stop. Give us discounted fares or some other benefit for providing this service. People in my community would love this.
“Give me a mechanism by which I can organize people in my neighborhood to do maintenance of my local subway stop. Give us discounted fares or some other benefit for providing this service. People in my community would love this.”
This, a million times. I could not agree more
… though TWU probably could not disagree more 🙁
Like “Adopt a Highway”?
Seconded.
They have the adopt the station program, guess what… it fail a long time ago.
TWU is not the problem, its the MTA management who has cut maintenance personal and costs throughout the years since Smalbany raided the budget.
True – but the litter is not the MTA or TWU’s fault. The other parts – yes… but the litter is the everyday citizen who disgustingly just throws down their trash.
I’ve always wondered why the MTA takes such a lax approach to the rampant homeless problem in their system. It’s a private system, and it’s not intended to serve as a residence, so I don’t see why the MTA doesn’t kick the homeless people out. They make train cars smell foul, and the contribute to the dirtiness of stations by using the stations as their bathrooms.
That’s NYPD job which it could have been an MTA job thanks to Giuliani
The MTA did a lot to solve the homeless problem. They even were hiring the homeless under something called the WEP program around 2000 to help clean the stations. . I guess they started paying less attention to the homeless since then.
And Ben, are you sure Herald Square was renovated in the 70s and 90s? I seem to recall work in the mid 80s where all the subway tile was replaced. I remember thinking that the work was unnecessary because the tile that was covered with new tile was in rather good shape.
It was around 1991-ish that the red-colored tiles and theme in general were put in. I don’t remember the 70’s renovation but that might have happened when they were renovating the rest of the Broadway line?
I was thinking mid 1980s because that’s when the planning started for it. The 70s renovation for the Broadway line involved the installation of the blue and white horizontal tile in front of the old tile. It didn’t affect the IND. I don’t believe there was any work on any of the Herald Square stations in the 70s unless it was minor work.
The planning for Grand Central also started in the mid-80s and for many other stations too. But that station had to be done in two parts, first the station and much later the mezzanine, because the bids for the whole station came in way over budget.
Atlantic Avenue was continually postponed since the mid-80s. I guess things just take a long time.
kick out the homeless to go where? to go freeze on the street? Homeless ppl have always existed and always will – you can’t just make them disappear. NYC spends an exorbitant amount of money housing them already…
What did London and Paris do with their old stations?
For starters they didn’t ignore their upkeep for decades. But that’s not exclusively the MTA’s fault, and considering the state of affairs in the 70’s and 80’s (not that I was around for them) they have made tremendous strides. I think in most places they’ve made all the easy cosmetic repairs that can be made, what remains (particularly water damaged walls) are likely repairs that would have to be timed to track closures, and probably fall to the bottom of the maintenance list when track closures occur. I am curious if improving atmosphere alone would bring more riders to the system, especially as numerous lines are already above capacity, and its not like the MTA can run more trains in many places.
Here in London station staff regularly clear litter off platforms and escalators so that it doesn’t blow about and end up on the track for starters. They also mop up spillages as and when they happen.
At the end of each run cleaners make a pass along each tube train and remove as much rubbish as they can – mainly newspapers – before the train starts its next run.
Mop and Bucket / steam cleaning happens during the night time closure (which of course NYC doesn’t have) which is a lot easier to do when there are no passengers about.
Many staff work at the same station all the time so they have an incentive to look after it – after all who wants to work in an environment that is dirtier than it needs to be?
TBH I am often disgusted at how dirty NYC subway stations are and it does not create a good impression on visitors. Simply blaming the age of the system is not acceptable. Yes it is hard to adequately clean walls that are across the tracks but it is not that hard to clean walls that are easily accessible.
Water damage in London stations, furthermore, has always been considered a top budgetary priority, with massive repairs being scheduled with a “money is no object” attitude. I have never seen a station in London with the sort of persistent water damage which is present in so much of NYC.
As it happens, I too was at Herald Square Station this past weekend, with my son sleeping in his stroller. It was a little bit of a chafe that the downtown-platform elevator was out of service; if I had known that I would have used the Bank of America elevator at 42d St and had a shorter hike down to the platform from the mezzanine.
Beside that, I thought the station was in pretty good shape, with not so much trash on the tracks or platform. I tend to agree with the MTA’s line here. When I am on the platform I am already mentally envisioning being on the train, so I don’t pay the same kind of attention to the environment that you do. As long as I can get to the platform fairly easily, with a stroller, I am not bothered by junky tiles for the couple minutes I’m waiting.
How many of the problems that Ben identified are signals of problems that can grow into major expenditures down the line?
Water damage? Corroding components? Paint peeling away or missing tiles?
If those problems signify underlying issues, they should be treated as more significant than the routine grime and garbage that needs to be addressed – and could be addressed with minimal cost (namely workers picking up garbage, washing down stations, etc.).
Preventative maintenance seems to have gone by the wayside as we’re still dealing with deferred maintenance issues from a generation ago. Yet, stations that underwent rehabilitation more recently are showing signs of wear and tear.
The system isn’t nearly as robust as we want it to be, but it also means getting the State to resume pitching in with its share of funding to cover these kinds of costs – costs that go to maintaining a state of good repair of not only rolling stock and signals, but the entirety of the system.
That means getting on Gov. Cuomo to make sure that the funds come to the MTA for spending on improving the system.
I really have no sympathy for the MTA, the TWU, the Politicians, Community Boards or anyone involved with Station Maintenance and Presentation. Basically they are all guilty. If it was just about some “Out Of The Way” (N) Train Station, I could understand “Out Of Sight Out Of Mind” (even though it is wrong), because things can get overlooked. However, most people know what Station is in the top five dumps in the Subway System (if not NUMERO UNO). Hint: It is a block from City Hall. Thus, it does not take a lot of effort for our so called “Leaders” to see the disgraceful shape it is in. I would love to see our “Leaders” tell the MTA and the TWU, not a single dime extra for you, until work begins at Chambers St. In addition, you guys will get a bonus, if work is finished early and correctly. But that would involve putting the public first ((Starting with CB 1), and these guys are not about that. That includes the incoming Mayor, who should say NO New Penn Station until Chambers St is fixed up.
If Chambers J/Z is worst station for condition, then Bowery just two stops north has to be the second worst. Its condition is awful, which is surprising considering it’s a single-line stop that isn’t as frequently used as others in the area.
Yes it’s right under City Hall, but its usage is in the tank compared to its Lexington Av cousin.
The IND part of Herald Square has, in general, always looked better than the BMT part of the complex, so you have to divide the critique into specific parts of the station (which is similar to other multi-platform stations, like the Grand Central complex, where the shuttle platforms look fine, while the Flushing Line platforms below need a tad more work).
W4 is a an important express / transfer station.
It is imposssible to understand why it has been allowed to deteriorate to its current state.
Agreed, and the photograph of the wall at West 4th speaks volumes about not only the MTA’s neglect of stations, but the miserable job they do when that actually perform some sort of maintenance. Look at the (remaining) tiles and you see that they are covered with the dark brown (almost black) paint drips from whenever the last time the ceiling was painted. Could they have done a sloppier job? And must they paint the ceilings black? It only adds to the gloom. I know that bright white wouldn’t stay that way for long, but perhaps some neutral taupe or something?
I have mentioned West 4th Street numerous times before ( my thoughts are well known on that).But Chambers Street because it is next to City Hall, makes a statement in and of itself that we do not care. I would also single out East Broadway ( where I live) as a real bad one, but I will see if they fix that during the Rutgers Tunnel job.
I think you could fix a lot of this if you had more higher-ups taking the train. Multiple MTA heads have lived on Long Island, but driven to work every day (except for the days when the post is harassing them for not taking the train) – because their office is near grand central, not penn, and they don’t want to take the subway crosstown. How many mayors, deputy mayors and commissioners drive to city hall even with all the transit nearby? Subways are for the plebs. Until that attitude changes, you’ll be hard pressed to get the MTA to make anything pretty.
“W4 is a an important express / transfer station.”
That’s exactly why it is so difficult to maintain. It cannot easily be shut down for maintenance.
Actually, I dont think theres any connection between station condition and the level of use, or if there is one it may actually be an inverse relationship. Herald Square and West 4th are in much worse shape than any lightly use outerborough residential station ive been in.
I was one of the those Macy’s shoppers this weekend. While waiting for a delayed uptown N train I witnessed a small group of German tourists waiting on the platform edge, gazing down at the tracks which was a mix of pooled water, garbage and two large rats scurrying back and forth. Above the pooled water was a badly water damaged tile, and a leaking roof. They looked disgusted, I would have too were I not used to it by now. Herald Square is my least favorite station, both for its lack of upkeep, and the fact that the route down to the IND platforms often (unless one knows the transfer well), winding down a number of ramps to get to the platform. There is an escalator but its not well signposted.
I just think in general its harder to make island platforms look new and neat. Whenever I’m passing through Hunters Point Avenue on the 7, or most of the local stops on the Broadway line in Manhattan on the N, I’m struck by how nice stations can look.
I really doubt how one could with a straight face say that the “IND part of Herald Square” looks better than the “BMT part of Herald Square”.
To my eyes, the IND section (B,D,F,M) of the station has always looked the worst, maybe it is the lighting, the low ceilings, the cramped platforms filled with stairways, escalators and little ability to see the station from one end to the other. Ever try walking from one end to the other on the 34th Street-Herald Square-IND platform, it is an obstacle course. Plenty of spaces for folks to block the passageways, and they do. The BMT section (N,Q,R) seems to have much better lighting, allows one to clearly see vastness of the station, the higher ceilings, and the platforms do not seem to be cluttered with stairways, escalators, etc. There was even an attached music machine some years back. Walking from one end of the station to the other of the BMT platform to me at least does not seem like a chore, there’s space so folks do not block much of the way.
That is not say there may or may be water stains, piles of dirt, and plenty of things that could really use a good scrubing, replacement or renovation – throughout the entire complex.
I think however there is another issue, the wish for certain downtown stations to be better, as showcases to the city. Local neighborhood stations really do not have that function. With the trend of political discussion in NYC to “do something about” Penn Station, I think there is also such a wish for Herald Square. Given the engineering issues – rebuilding the lowest station is simply out of the question
Just my thoughts.
Mike
The worst part is that it has nationwide repercussions.
Everybody goes to NYC. That includes millions of people who know nothing about urban areas or transit. You know, the people who vote against hourly bus service because it will bring crime to their cul-de-sac.
The NYC metro COULD be a way to present to people how great transit can be. Instead, all it does is double down on stereotypes.
Transit is dirty. It smells bad. It’s not maintained. It’s so damned loud. It’s for the poor, the downtrodden, and the masses.
Why on earth would Mrs. Suburb want this in her city?
Thank you MTA, for hurting transit nationwide.
….now a monorail, those are nice! Have you been on the one at Disney? Its so clean, runs on time, and no homeless people. That, Mrs. Suburb wants.
“The NYC metro COULD be a way to present to people how great transit can be. Instead, all it does is double down on stereotypes.
Transit is dirty. It smells bad. It’s not maintained. It’s so damned loud. It’s for the poor, the downtrodden, and the masses.”
Oh, and it’s not wheelchair-accessible. Take the (narrow, poorly maintained) stairs, whether you can or not!
NYC really does give public transit a bad image.
Boston faced similar problems; Boston looks much nicer. Philadelphia faced arguably far *more* neglect — Philadelphia still faces such levels of neglect that it may have to shut down half the system — and Philadephia’s stations still look nicer.
London looks positively spotless compared to NYC, and London’s system is OLDER and covered in soot from STEAM ENGINES.
The worst of it is, NY has truly beautiful train stations from the IRT era — stations which people actually go out of their way to photograph. But nobody ever bothers to maintain, clean, or repair the tilework.
The resulting image is “Ah, this country could do great things once. But it can’t even maintain its old stuff any more.” The experience of visiting NYC is, strangely, reminiscent of visiting the Soviet Union in the 1990s.
“Philadephia’s stations still look nicer”
I’d rather be in any other NYC station than spend time in Suburban Station or Market East. But the rest of your point is well-taken.
For this reason, the NYC Subway sucks.
I hate to say it, but I think that it’s a people problem. It’s not just the MTA workers, or the bosses, or the unions, or the contractors – it’s all of them. And it’s not just the politicians, or the bureaucrats, or the money, or the media – it’s all of them. And it’s not about the 24/7, or about how old the system is, or how big, or about the food rules, or about trash cans – it’s about all of that. And it’s not just about the litterbugs, or the homeless, or the rats, or the drunks, or the police – it’s about all of that.
Really, just look at the DC Metro.
Basically, it’s not about them, it’s about us.
NYC is significantly more dirty than Boston or DC (garbage on streets).
Queens resembles an Indian landfill.
Its not culture, its broken windows. Start slapping $100 fines left and right for littering and watch the city become like Zurich in a month.
Problem is, cops are too busy parking in bike lanes harassing brown people to care.
Concur.
The laws against littering in the subway and outside of it are barely enforced.
Prosecute littering as you do smoking in bars.
Pigs litter now as there is no real penalty.
When I wrote the Parks Dept. about a particular park and asked why they don’t give out fines – they said it’s because 1) it’s hard to enforce because if there is a bbq – who do they give the ticket to. 2) they risk confrontations.
The police should give more tickets for litter. I’d rather they do that than parking tickets.
Uh, “they risk confrontations”?
This is the city where the police department is harassing innocent people for “walking while looking funny”, and the one which assaulted protesters, and the one which was caught on tape by Adrian Schoolcraft arresting innocent people in order to meet quotas, and the one which let a policeman get away with violently assaulting a judge.
I don’t think the police department is afraid of confrontations. I think they’re just run by evil people who don’t want to even try to do their job.
It’s not the police he’s talking about. Parks has its own brute squad, which I don’t think carries guns.
Which should be a valuable lesson: the NYPD would probably be much less brutal and more polite if it had its guns taken away too.
“evil people” seems unnecessarily accusatory; I’d just say “lazy people”, personally.
I said “parks department”
How come improving the passenger experience in the subway is useful but improving the experience at Penn or Fulton or the WTC isn’t?
Who’s saying it isn’t?
No offense intended, but in previous articles covering Fulton, Penn, etc it’s seemed to me that your stance has been that these projects are pointless, extravagant wastes because they don’t necessarily increase service, and yet in this article you enumerate the very reasons that projects focusing more on form rather than function are in fact useful. Spending money on extending service would be great, but that doesn’t mean we can’t spend money on enhancing the passenger experience when the opportunity presents itself.
PATH is a pointless, extravagant waste because of the price tag, its overwrought design and the way no one at the PA has held Calatrava’s design and costs in check. As to Penn Station, I’m in favor of aesthetic improvements if they can be implemented at something approaching a reasonable cost and with upgrades to transit capacity. Here, I’m not even agreeing with the fact that station maintenance is form rather than function.
But where is the line drawn between form and function? Keeping a subway station clean doesn’t bring more trains through. Does an attractive headhouse that improves passenger/potential-passenger experience, brings in revenue via retail, and raises surrounding property value form or function? It might not increase function via capacity, but it might increase function via form. PATH and Penn might be ridiculously, needlessly expensive, but that doesn’t mean the end results are without value.
There’s no brightline. A multi-billion-dollar subway stop that was originally supposed to cost half as much and draws design inspiration from a porcupine isn’t a good use of limited resources.
Brockman, a big part of what is going on is knowing priorities and symbolism. Another subject that I have talked long and hard about was Willets Point. One thing about Willets Point was it was used as a tool to beat New York over the head with, which is why it was more important to get the cleanup going than say Hallets Point. Is it right? Maybe, maybe not but it is what it is. Taking this back to Chambers St, this Station ( and West 4th Street), when compared to Taj Majal Palaces like the PATH Station, should be a perfect symbol for De Blasio’s “Two New York’s” (even for those on the right and who are anything but wealthy (such as myself) but do not agree with Socialism as a cure). Most of us would accept a fare increase, if a modest amount say .25 cents a ride if it was used to fix up those kind of Stations ( obviously a locked box approach). The problem of course, De Blasio is doubling down on the kind of projects ( Penn Station) that pleases the you guessed it the 1% types found at the NY Times and the Municipal Art Society, instead of the average straphanger. Basically, on transit, so far it is more like “The Who’s” “Meet The New Boss, Same As The Old Boss.” At least Bloomberg got Willets Point started, let’s see if De Blasio can do the same with Chambers St? I will be spending some time following this when I leave New York for Arizona.
De Blasio is doing anything related to Penn Station (or transit at all) that’s more than a vague and empty promise? That’s news to everyone.
Ben, I hope you are right and I am wrong on this one. I am just quoting what he said and until proven otherwise, I am not accusing anyone of breaking promises ( let alone lying).
That’s naive. Don’t believe people until they make concrete promises to even be held to. De Blasio is a shoe-in, so he doesn’t have to.
The way things stand now, any normal SBS expansion allows de Blasio to keep his “promise” – assuming you accept SBS as BRT (which you may as well).
having a clean and well kept station is different than overspending on architectural monuments to the same architects ego.
How inefficient is the “bathroom tile” wall design of the IND? I know we like it for historic purposes, but look at that photo of W 4th St. Isn’t it time to bring some of these stations into the 21st century with large panels that are easily swappable for cleaning/replacement? Do all 400 or so pre-war stations really need to be stuck in that era?
The IRT stations are works of art which belong on the National Historical Landmarks list, and they really should be maintained with their original incredibly decorative tilework.
Some of the BMT stations have similarly worthwhile tilework.
The IND “bathroom tile” design is, by comparison, incredibly cheap to maintain, and quite easy to replace bits of. Might as well keep most of them. Though they are incredibly same-y (unlike the each-station-unique IRT) so I wouldn’t consider it a loss if some of them changed.
The IND “bathroom” tile-style has been retained to a large extent in station renovations but the reality is that these are indeed large panels that simply mimic the look of smaller tiles. The problem is that while one would think these would be easier to maintain, the MTA does little in that regards. So even in recently renovated stations such as 42nd/8th we already have permanently rust-stained panels.
NYC Transit’s stations “present” awfully for several reasons, some natural, some “self-inflicted”.
1. Age
2. Water
3. Shoddy workmanship since the 70s. Covering of poles in tiles (like at the platform level at Grand Central) often leaves voids which cause tiles to chip.
4. Poor choice of materials/lack of commitment to maintain. Each station renovation is “one of a kind”. Within a few years, damage starts to show and mismatched repairs make it look like crap. In extreme cases, elements that “made” the renovation are stripped out. Examples: The state of the metal ceiling at 53rd & 3rd. The removal of the backlit panels at Bowling Green. The “compass” on the mezzanine at Grand Central. Any floor surfaced with tile. The exotic Czech glass tile at Borough Hall (4-5). Contrast with Philip Johnson’s 49th & 7th or the grimy, but solid 57th & 6th. Look at the “artwork” above the northbound IND at Herald Square: Has anyone thought to scrub down the surfaces?
#3 / #4 seem crucial. #2 — well, dealing with water problems should have been absolute top priority, but as we saw at the new South Ferry station, wasn’t.
Even bare concrete looks OK if you’ve managed to stop the water problems. And of course water infiltration from behind is a major cause of tile damage, metal panel damage, etc.