Home Author
Author

Benjamin Kabak

AsidesPodcast

Introducing the Second Ave. Sagas’ podcast ‘The Next Stop Is…’

by Benjamin Kabak
written by Benjamin Kabak on July 24, 2013

After nearly a year of tossing the idea around, long-term reader and veteran podcast producer Eric Brasure and I finally got the ball rolling on a new project, and today, I’m proud to introduce the first episode of “The Next Stop Is…” the new Second Ave. Sagas’ podcast. Every other Wednesday, I’ll join Eric to discuss some of the latest transit news and views. As the show develops we hope to respond to reader and listener questions and comments as well.

In the debut episode, we discuss the MTA’s new policy on station naming rights, the recently announced service increases to the G and M trains, and give some thoughts on the MTA’s next twenty years. We’re aiming to keep the show length at around 30 minutes — the perfect length for a subway ride listen.

We’ll be up and running in iTunes soon, and I’m working on a logo to add to the sidebar. In the mean time, you can listen here and grab a podcast-only RSS feed here.

Podcast: Play in new window | Download

Subscribe: RSS

4 comments
1 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
MetroCard

The Metrocard’s unknown replacement as a campaign issue

by Benjamin Kabak
written by Benjamin Kabak on July 24, 2013

After nearly ten years of fits and starts, the MTA’s on-again, off-again plan to replace the swipe-based Metrocard with something more modern has taken on a quixotic overtone. Numerous pilots led the MTA to issue plans for a charge card-based contactless solution, but low adoption rates by the country’s major banks led the agency to shelf this project. It’s all rather “inside baseball,” but this week, for some reason, it became a part of the ongoing drama that is the current mayoral campaign.

It takes a lot of institutional memory to remember the MTA’s first contactless pilot back in the early-to-mid 2000s, but there it was. Sponsored by Mastercard, the 2006 pilot ran for a bunch of much with limited success on the Lexington Ave. IRT, and a few years ago, a wider pilot also sponsored by Mastercard seemed promising as well. The MTA had hoped to start the gradual Metrocard phase-out by 2012, and when Jay Walder arrived, he expressed his desire to ditch the Metrocard in favor of something that moved beyond the proprietary technology of London’s Oyster card.

When Walder left, the halting effort faltered. The MTA had issued a comprehensive document in May of 2011 with its plans in place, but the technology never caught on. Earlier this year, the agency said they hope to have a plan in place within five years as, by 2019, it will become prohibitively expensive to maintain the current Metrocard technology. The MTA, I concluded, was stuck, but outside of the occasional swipe error, the vast majority of subway riders are perfectly happy with their Metrocards.

Christine Quinn is not one of them. In comments earlier this week, she urged the MTA to hurry it up already, and while it’s not exactly a mainstream campaign issue, her points are valid. Erin Durkin reported:

City Council Speaker Christine Quinn is pushing the MTA to speed up a delayed plan to let straphangers get on to subways without swiping MetroCards…“The reality is a promise was made to straphangers and that promise was not lived up to,” the mayoral hopeful said. “We in New York City have fallen behind other municipalities in providing the quickest, easiest, most cost effective transit in the country, in part because we’re still so dedicated to using the MetroCard.”

…Quinn chalked up the delay to “a combination of faulty planning, turnover in leadership, and misguided prioritization.”

MTA officials say their original plan depended on banks developing credit and debit cards with chips in them to allow contactless use, which the industry was expected to do a few years ago but never happened on a widespread basis. Now, the agency is waiting to see whether private industry ends up turning to credit cards, mobile phones, key fobs, or some other type of technology for no-swipe payments. “We don’t want to get in the business of issuing our own card and we don’t want to pick winners,” said MTA spokesman Adam Lisberg. “The idea is lets wait, rather than making a bad bet.”

In the meantime, the agency is working on designing the back end of a no-swipe system including wiring and office equipment, which they can add card readers to when a technology is chosen down the road. “It would be incorrect to say that we’re not working on it, that we’re not pushing for it, but we want to do it smart,” Lisberg said. “If we were to choose a new technology now, we’d be locked into that.”

Lisberg’s comments are the most we’ve seen from the MTA on this topic in months, and the fact that they now have a full-time Chairman and CEO who plans to stick around means that institutional turnover at the top should be eliminated for the next few years. But Quinn is right: With the Metrocard still in play, the MTA is not maximizing the revenue it draws in from fares, and even shaving a few cents per dollar off of its fare collection costs can help the MTA realize a few hundred million in added revenue.

The debate though seems to be one of approach. Swipe-less touch-based technology that works is out there. It exists in Boston and Washington, D.C., London and Hong Kong. It’s coming to Philadelphia too. Meanwhile, a bank card-based system is slowly getting rolled out in London at the behest of Transport for London. The MTA, though, has taken a more passive approach that looks more like paralysis than anything else. Waiting for the next technology and then slowly bringing it to market means we’re stuck with the Metrocard for the foreseeable future.

As with most things MTA, the next mayor’s power is limited, but their board appointees, as the Daily News notes, can push the issue. Quinn’s concern won’t win her flocks of voters, but it’s an astute issue that’s been hanging over the MTA’s collective heads for nearly eight years and counting. It’s time to move it forward.

45 comments
1 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
Triboro RX

As Triboro RX looms, a mayoral race on ferries emerges

by Benjamin Kabak
written by Benjamin Kabak on July 23, 2013

A 2008 MTA presentation on the agency’s 40th anniversary previewed a circumferential subway route.

For some reason or another, the 2013 Mayoral campaign has taken a turn for the water. While the MTA is beginning to take a serious look at forecasting transit demand, the front-running Anthony Weiner and Christine Quinn are trying to out-do each other on ferry proposals. It’s a transit policy focused around gimmicks rather than solutions.

The latest wacky idea in a campaign filled with them comes from Christine Quinn. In order to pander to voters supposedly improve commutes for people who I guess work at the Intrepid, Quinn has proposed an express ferry from Staten Island to Manhattan’s Pier 79 near 39th St. and the West Side Highway. Quinn claims such a ferry service would “help spur job growth and economic development on both Staten Island and on Manhattan’s Westside” and would offer a “20-minute direct access to midtown Manhattan.” To provide access to Manhattan’s actual job core, Quinn suggests subsidized bus shuttles or Citi Bike expansion. Never mind that a new subway station is opening in 11 months but half a mile away from the ferry terminal.

To garner support for this plan, Quinn points to the runaway success of the East River Ferries, but even that seems to be overstated. These ferries — with a fare structure separate and apart from the subway — have drawn 2.1 million riders in two years which averages out to just under 3000 a day. That’s essentially the equivalent of a whopping three peak-hour subway trains.

Ferries have limited utility in New York City because few people live near the water and even fewer work near the water. Without fare integration, ferries riders likely have a two-seat, two-fare ride to get to work, and even if Quinn can deliver a ride to Midtown that’s five minutes shorter than the current SI ferry to Whitehall, riders will still have to make the trek across Manhattan to get to work. Ferries may help out a handful of SI commuters in this instance, but they simply do not solve the city’s overarching mobility and transit expansion problems.

One project the mayoral candidates could focus on instead of ferries involves an abandoned right-of-way that stretches through numerous boroughs. Over the years, I’ve examined the Triboro RX in many contexts. Lee Sander discussed itdrew comparisons between the London’s new orbital line and the Triboro RX ROW. The line would carry around 75,000 passengers per day, and it’s one that could be implemented relatively easily.

Eric Jaffe at The Atlantic Cities examined the Triboro RX idea yesterday and determined that it is a far more valuable long-term growth project than ferries. “I think there’s an awful lot of transportation projects that are unimportant that people are talking about,” Jeff Zupan of the Regional Plan Association said. “On the other side of the coin, here’s one that has all the makings of being a real winner.” The RPA has been a major proponent of the Triboro RX route for nearly two decades.

Jaffe had more:

Best of all, almost the entire right-of-way necessary for the route is already available. That means the Triboro Rx would end up costing much, much less than a completely new line project like the Second Avenue line. (To bring the X line to Yankee Stadium, as described in the 1996 plan, would require some new terrain, but Zupan now says a more viable option could be to avoid that hassle and end the line near Hunt’s Point instead.)

The sheer extent of the line, Census commute patterns for the outer boroughs, the general high rate of transit use among immigrants — all these elements point to Triboro Rx becoming a big hit…”There’s a number of things that suggest that the Triboro Rx’s time is closer to coming than it was in 1996,” says Zupan.

Despite all its promise, the Triboro Rx still has a number of obstacles in its path. The project could conflict with the proposed cross-harbor rail tunnel beloved by U.S. Congressman Jerrold Nadler of New York. The Federal Railroad Administration has requirements for tracks shared by freight and passenger rail that initial plans might not meet. The MTA recently told Dana Rubinstein of Capital NY that it “never formally backed” the X line concept.

The stumbling blocks are formidable, and it’s much easier for a mayoral candidate to avoid land-based transit projects during campaigns. After all, some people won’t endorse a new train line running through their backyards or while adding a ferry route isn’t nearly as disruptive as building out a train line. Still, the Triboro RX line could happen if any politician were willing to take a risk, and the current plan can even snake just across the Narrows to deliver a subway connection to Staten Island. It’s a far more useful transit expansion designed to meet the long-term growth patterns of the city, and it’s not a boat.

105 comments
1 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
Capital Program 2015-2019

Eying the MTA’s next twenty years

by Benjamin Kabak
written by Benjamin Kabak on July 23, 2013
To keep up with growth and transit demand, the MTA has identified 25 potential corridors for future SBS routes.

To keep up with growth and transit demand, the MTA has identified 25 potential corridors for future SBS routes.

For those who were in the city and old enough in 1993, that subway system of yesteryear was a sight to behold. Redbirds roamed the 2, 5 and 7 while stations were amidst only the early days of a rehab program. The system had shed its graffiti, but it wasn’t considered completely safe. Ridership had hit an all-time low, and the Metrocard was but a pilot program gaining headlines but few converts.

Today, whether we like to admit it or not, we have a relatively popular and robust system. Much of the rolling stock is less than 15 years old while the rails have been rehabilitated to restore reliability. The station environments have improved in fits and starts, and safety is barely a concern. Ridership in May reached an all-time high for the month, and no one thinks twice about riding at night. The Metrocard is now obsolete and hopefully on the way out. The 7 line extension will open in 11 months, and the first phase of the Second Ave. Subway is less than 40 months away. Where will the next twenty years take us?

As the MTA gears up for its next capital program and the changing demographics of a growing New York City, that’s the question agency officials are beginning to ask. In a presentation to the MTA Board yesterday, agency officials delivered a framework for a needs assessment that will focus on the next 20 years. The document is available here as a pdf, and it tells the story of a city more dependent on its transit network and a young demographic that has, so far, chosen to eschew car ownership in New York. It anticipates a transit network that will need to be more robust and more flexible as off-peak ridership continues to grow.

For the MTA, the next twenty years may have to mirror the last. Ridership likely won’t grow by another 58 percent as it has since 1992, but the system as it is set up now would be hard-pressed to handle even a 30 percent increase over today’s ridership levels. Eying the future, the MTA sees trips to Manhattan’s Central Business District flat-lining, and areas with historically low ridership are seeing growth. These trends tend to be overstated though as CBD trips still account for a huge percentage of subway rides, and even a small shift of rides to hours outside of peak times is unlikely to make an impact.

Still, the MTA is right to recognize that it must improve Outer Borough transit, and it must assume that car ownership and trips will continue to decrease as gas prices, tolls, parking and congestion remain significant intractable barriers for drivers. With a projected 17 million people in the MTA region by 2035, the agency has to add service, but their plans are modest. They want to attain and maintain a state of good repair while building out the full Second Ave. Subway. This is notable because it’s one of the few times in recent years the MTA has acknowledged the need and desire to keep SAS going. Officials have generally refused to comment on future phases before the current one was fully funded. Generally, though, the Twenty Year Plan’s solution for subway capacity issues focuses around new entrances to better distribute passenger loads while adding 25 Select Bus Service routes. It’s a lot, but is it enough?

This document serves as a guideline for more study. It will form the underlying assumptions that will drive the MTA’s next capital plan, and that plan will likely feature more big-ticket items. I’m hopeful that we’ll see initial funding requests for Phase 2 of the Second Ave. Subway and the initial asks for Penn Station Access as well. Without champions though, we’re unlikely to see the MTA advocating on its own for a Nostrand or Utica Ave. subway, let alone the TriboroRX plan.

The next twenty years will, needless to say, remain a mystery, but two decades ago, who would have believed any part of the Second Ave. Subway would be on its way to reality, that the L train would be a popular line, that people would be buying in Bushwick in droves? The next twenty years are likely to be just as surprising, and the MTA is going to have to plan ahead while moving faster on transit network expansion plans. Buses by themselves won’t cut it, but subways are prohibitively expensive. These are the challenges for the next five years, the next ten years and the next twenty years.

125 comments
1 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
AsidesManhattanMTA

Quick Hits: More frequent board meetings; repairs in Northern Manhattan

by Benjamin Kabak
written by Benjamin Kabak on July 22, 2013

Two minor transit stories surfaced today that warrant a quick mention. Toward the end of his tenure as MTA CEO and Chairman, Joe Lhota announced a plan to reduce the number of MTA Board meetings per year. Lhota proposed eight meetings and two public forums instead of 11 monthly meetings. This move lasted all of seven months as the MTA this week will vote on a plan to revert to its long-standing tradition of monthly meetings.

The Times first reported this story earlier today, and the details are buried in the Governance Committee materials [pdf]. Essentially, the change hasn’t fit in with operating procedures at the MTA. Data is gathered monthly even if it is reported to the Board only every six or seven weeks, and a long gap between meetings can slow down emergency appropriates and approvals needed to respond quickly to damage caused from, say, a major hurricane. Whether this is a case of a lumbering bureaucracy failing to adapt to a new normal or a clear sign that monthly meetings are required is up for debate.

In other news, renovations at two Northern Manhattan subway stops have begun, DNA Info reported. On its own, this isn’t exactly a pressing concern, but these aren’t normal stops. Back in 2009, a section of the ceiling at 181st St. fell on the tracks, and a subsequent inspection revealed structural concerns with the tiling at that station and 168th St. It’s stunningly taken nearly four years to get long-term repairs started.

The work will cost $42 million, and the MTA anticipates a completion time of 29 months. During the next two a half years, the 1 train will not run north of 137th St. for 13 weekends and 40 overnights. This is a prime example of a location where a total line shutdown would result in faster work, but many commuters north of Dyckman St. have no nearby alternate subway service.

1 comment
1 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
MTA Economics

Weekend M to Manhattan, G expansion among MTA service upgrades

by Benjamin Kabak
written by Benjamin Kabak on July 22, 2013

As part of the MTA’s plan to spend $40 million in unexpected state revenue on its customers, Transit will expand weekend service on the M to Manhattan and will increase G train service during the afternoon rush, as outlined in its line review. Gov. Andrew Cuomo announced these enhancements as well as some added bus service that will total $7.8 million, and the MTA plans to invest another $5.9 million in the customer experience and station environment as well.

“For the second year in a row, the state has invested in significant enhancements and expansions to our state’s transit system that will improve the experience of the eight million commuters who use the MTA,” Governor Cuomo, who continued his streak of taking credit for the MTA’s good news, said in a statement. “In the last two and a half years, our administration has made real improvements to the nation’s largest public transit system, implementing reforms that have improved services and made the MTA more efficient by reducing costs, cutting waste and putting the needs of straphangers and commuters first.”

According to the release, these service improvements will benefit nearly 90,000 passengers daily. G trains will operate every eight minutes from 3 p.m. to 9 p.m. on weekdays, cutting headways down from 10 minutes. On weekends, M trains will run from Middle Village, Queens to Essex/Delancey, providing riders with a direct connection to the F. Currently, M riders must make two transfers — from the M to the J and the J to the F — for service into midtown and points north. The M will not operate north of Essex/Delancey or along the Queens Boulevard line.

The other half of the investment picture involves nearly $6 million for other improvements. Transit will hire more cleaners for tracks and stations and will begin to adjust turnstile and Metrocard Vending Machine layouts as well. I hope to have more on these efforts later in the week.

Additionally, Transit will restore some bus routes lost to the 2010 cuts and beef up service on other lines. The newly restored routes include the B37 and B70 in Brooklyn, weekend M8 and Q31 service, Sunday Q77 buses, and additional hours of operation for the S93. The MTA also plans to add a yet-to-be-determined Select Bus Service route and will study bus service in Co-Op City to identify routing gaps and potential solutions. I question the wisdom of restoring service along bus routes that didn’t have the ridership to support it, but perhaps the attention devoted to these lines over the past two years will drive up ridership.

Outside of the city, the LIRR will invest $2.6 million in added service as well. Trains will run every 30 minutes on the weekends to and from Ronkonkoma and Port Washington. Weekend service to Greenport will be extended, and five peak-hour weekday trains will be added on crowded routes. Metro-North has a more modest ask as the railroad will get an additional $1.7 million to “add real-time customer information displays at all of its stations in New York State by 2020.”

For the MTA’s customers, this news is good. After years of service cuts, expanded service is welcome even if the subway enhancements are limited to two lines with relatively low ridership. The fundamental problems of comprehensive access and more frequent service on lines at or near capacity are side-stepped in this plan, but on the other hand, the MTA had only limited resources for expanded service. Officials acknowledged too that the long-term financial picture remains unsettled, at best.

“We have listened to our customers, and we are responding with more bus, subway and commuter rail service as well as enhancements to make that service more reliable and more enjoyable,” MTA Chairman and CEO Thomas F. Prendergast said in a statement. “We are committed to aggressively reducing our costs, and to strengthening service whenever we have sustainable resources to do so. But our Financial Plan remains fragile, and our financial challenges – both short and long term – are numerous. The revised Financial Plan puts our customer needs first while also allocating resources to longer-term challenges like reducing pension liabilities, lowering retiree health care costs and providing initial funding for our next Capital Program.”

56 comments
1 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
MTA Economics

An MTA policy – but no deals – for subway station naming rights

by Benjamin Kabak
written by Benjamin Kabak on July 21, 2013

Forest City Ratner pays $200,000 a year to append the Barclays Center name to the Atlantic Ave. subway stop. (Photo by Benjamin Kabak)

The MTA is set to unveil a series of budget documents this week that will set the stage for the next few years’ worth of conversations. They’re unveiling revised estimates for the current capital plan based on the need to spend money to repair the system and mitigate the impact of future storms and surges, and they’re keeping in an eye on the next twenty years of system growth as well. I’ll be taking a closer look at these documents this week, but one theme is a constant: Where will the MTA get the money to do whatever it is it wants to do?

One way the MTA won’t get money is through station naming rights deals. The agency needs billions of dollars, and even the most lucrative naming rights deal in the U.S. is worth only around $1 million annually. The MTA’s one current naming rights deal for a subway station is netting the agency a whopping $200,000 a year. But that’s not stopping the MTA from putting itself out there. This week, as part of the July board meetings, the MTA is formalizing its station naming strategy, and I think it gets everything right. Whether it can make money from the effort remains to be seen.

The new guidelines will be voted on this week, and they are available as a pdf on the MTA’s website. The MTA is consolidating the naming rights process and procedures so that Jeffrey Rosen, the head of the agency’s real estate department, and the new policy will not apply to directional signage, changes to the street grid or advertising campaigns that have no impact on a station name. It will apply to any other situation where an advertiser wants change “the official designation” of any MTA facility. This can include signage, maps and on-board announcements similar to the way Barclays Center has replaced Pacific St. at the Atlantic Ave. subway complex.

By putting forward this proposal, the MTA says it wants to receive “fair value” for the rights to name its stations. At the same time, the agency wants to “respect the historic nature” of its stations — which is less of a concern than the third factor: ensuring that customers can “safely and efficiently navigate the MTA system.” The third qualification I’ve stressed repeatedly, and it’s why SEPTA’s naming rights deal fails. AT&T Station — the replacement name for the Pattison station — tells a rider nothing about the station; it could be anywhere. But for its flaws, Atlantic Ave./Barclays Center carries a major destination in the sponsored station name.

With these policy goals in mind, the MTA set forth its standards. It will require “a compelling nexus between the Facility and the Sponsor” for any naming rights deals. “Requests for renaming,” the policy says, “will only be accepted from Sponsors with a unique or iconic geographic, historic or other connection to such [station] that would be readily apparent to typical MTA customers.” In other words, advertisings just looking to slap their names on a station won’t be able to do so. The Tropicana Station at Bryant Park won’t become a reality, but if Macy’s, for instance, wanted to buy out the Herald Square station, the MTA may listen. This limitation could eliminate many potential advertisers before the MTA even has the chance to discuss money.

If any naming rights venture gets this far then, the next issue concerns value. Considering how naming rights deals are tough to come by, it’s hard to say what “fair value” means in any context, but in addition to pure dollars, the MTA will also consider promised capital upgrades made by the sponsor or capita upgrades taken on by the sponsor in exchange for the naming rights. In essence, the MTA is creating something of an Adopt-a-Station program. How this works in practice rather than theory again remains to be seen.

Matt Flegenheimer of The Times reported on this plan over the weekend, and he had the chance to gain more insight into the process. MTA advisers recognize that transit agencies across the nation are hoping to draw money from naming rights, and one of MTA CEO and Chairman Tom Prendergast’s right-hand men claimed that “from time to time,” advertisers have expressed an interest in making a deal.

The policy, the MTA says, is to protect its customers too. “We don’t want to be confusing people,” Allen Cappelli, an MTA Board member, said. “There are neighborhoods where I would be very hesitant because of the geographic significance.” The MTA also won’t rename stations for people, living or dead. (Sorry, Ed Koch.)

This all sounds well and good. Yet, I can’t help but think it’s all for nothing. I’ve followed this issue for years, and nothing much has come of it. Madrid recently renamed an entire line for just €1 million a year while Boston has unsuccessfully put its station names up for sale. Austin, Toronto, New Jersey, D.C. and Chicago all want someone to pay for their stations, but very few people are biting. It’s too hard to overcome the stigma of being associated with something most people love to hate for these deals to be worthwhile. Maybe the MTA can realize some dollars, and they have a solid policy in place. But it’s a policy more like than not to go untested over the years.

12 comments
1 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
Service Advisories

Weekend work impacting 14 subway lines

by Benjamin Kabak
written by Benjamin Kabak on July 19, 2013
Today's amNew York cover highlighted the myriad service advisories confronting subway riders each week.

Today’s amNew York cover highlighted the myriad service advisories confronting subway riders each week.

Today’s amNew York cover amused me. For nearly seven years, I’ve tracked the weekend service advisories every Friday, and they are not exactly news. The MTA has been rerouting most routes for capital work for as long as I’ve hosted this site, and they haven’t gotten worse or better.

The resulting article was fairly nuanced but with some surprising contentions. Andrew Albert, a long-time MTA Board member, said that the diversions have gotten worse recently. “The norm, just a few diversions, you’re talking probably over two to three years ago,” he said. But I disagree. In one form or another, these have gone on apace for years. It’s inconvenient and annoying, especially as weekend ridership spikes. But it’s life amidst a system struggling to catch up after years of deferred maintenance.

With that in mind, here are this weekend’s changes. The heat — it’s still 88 degrees as of 11:20 on Friday — doesn’t make changes any better.


From 11:30 p.m. Friday, July 19 to 5 a.m. Monday, July 22, there is no 1 train service between 34th Street-Penn Station and South Ferry due to Cortlandt Street station reconstruction. Customers should take the 2, 3 trains and free shuttle buses.

  • Free shuttle buses operate between Chambers Street and South Ferry.
  • 2 and 3 trains run local in both directions between Chambers Street and 34th Street-Penn Station.

Overnight Note: 3 trains run express between 148th Street and Times Square-42nd Street.


From 3:45 a.m. Saturday, July 20 to 10 p.m. Sunday, July 21, there are no 2 trains between 241st Street and Nereid Avenue due to removal of old and installation of new track panels south of 241st Street. The Bx39 bus (daytime and evening) and free shuttle buses (overnight) will provide alternate service.


From 11:45 p.m. Friday, July 19 to 5 a.m. Monday, July 22, Coney Island-bound A trains run local from 59th Street-Columbus Circle to West 4th Street, then are rerouted via the F line to Jay Street-MetroTech due to asbestos abatement south of Chamber Street.


From 6:30 a.m. to midnight, Saturday, July 20 and Sunday, July 21, Brooklyn-bound C trains are rerouted via the F line from West 4th Street to Jay Street-MetroTech due to asbestos abatement south of Chambers Street.


From 11:45 p.m. Friday, July 19 to 6:30 a.m. Saturday, July 20, from 11:45 p.m. Saturday, July 20 to 6:30 a.m. Sunday, July 21 and from 11:45 p.m. Sunday, July 21 to 5 a.m. Monday, July 22, Coney Island-bound D trains run express from Atlantic Avenue-Barclays Center to 36th Street due to track tie renewal at Union Street.


From 11:45 p.m. Friday, July 19 to 5 a.m. Monday, July 22, downtown E trains run express from 34th Street-Penn Station to Canal Street due to asbestos abatement south of Chambers Street.


From 11:15 p.m. Friday, July 19 to 5 a.m. Monday, July 22, Coney Island-bound F trains are rerouted via the M line after 36th Street, Queens to 47th-50th Sts due to station work at Lexington Avenue-63rd Street for the Second Avenue Subway Project.


From 11:45 p.m. Friday, July 19 to 5 a.m. Monday, July 22, there is no G train service between Court Square and Nassau Avenue. G trains operate between Nassau Avenue and Church Avenue. There is no G service at Greenpoint Avenue, 21st Street and Court Square.

Free shuttle buses operate on two routes:

  • Via Manhattan Avenue between Nassau Avenue G and Court Square
  • Via McGuinness Blvd between Lorimer Street L and Court Square

Customers may transfer between:

  • G trains and shuttle buses at Nassau Avenue
  • L trains and shuttle buses at Lorimer Street
  • E and 7 trains and shuttle buses at Court Square


From 3:30 a.m. Saturday, July 20 to 10 p.m. Sunday, July 21, there is no J train service between Broadway Junction and Myrtle Avenue due to switch renewal north of Myrtle Avenue-Broadway and track panel installation at Kosciusko Street. J trains operate in two sections:

  • Between Jamaica Center and Broadway Junction
  • Between Chambers Street and Myrtle Avenue, and then rerouted via the M line to Metropolitan Avenue.

Free shuttle buses operate between Broadway Junction and Myrtle Avenue, making stations stops at Chauncey Street, Halsey Street, Gates Avenue and Kosciusko Street.

  • Transfer between J trains and free shuttle buses at Broadway Junction and/or Myrtle Avenue.
  • Transfer between J and L trains at Myrtle-Wyckoff Avs and/or Broadway Junction.


From 6 a.m. to 6 p.m., Saturday, July 20 and Sunday, July 21, L service operates in two sections due to switch work north of Rockaway Parkway:

  • Between 8th Avenue and Broadway Junction
  • Between Broadway Junction and Rockaway Parkway (every 24 minutes)


From 3:30 a.m. Saturday, July 20 to 10 p.m. Sunday, July 21, M service is suspended due to station renewal work at Fresh Pond Road, Forest, Seneca, Knickerbocker and Central Avenues. Customers should take the J train making all M stops between Myrtle Avenue and Metropolitan Avenue. (See J entry.)


From 12:01 a.m. Saturday, July 20 to 5 a.m. Monday, July 22, N trains are rerouted via the R line in both directions between Canal Street and Atlantic Avenue-Barclays Center due to general maintenance and prep work on the Manhattan Bridge prior to the Montague tube shutdown. N trains will stop at City Hall, Cortlandt Street, Rector Street, Whitehall Street, Court Street, Jay Street-MetroTech and DeKalb Avenue.


From 11:45 p.m. Friday, July 19 to 6:30 a.m. Saturday, July 20, from 11:45 p.m. Saturday, July 20 to 6:30 a.m. Sunday, July 21 and from 11:45 p.m. Sunday, July 21 to 5 a.m. Monday, July 22, Coney Island-bound N trains run express from Atlantic Avenue-Barclays Center to 36th Street due to track tie renewal at Union Street.


From 12:01 a.m. Saturday, July 20 to 5 a.m. Monday, July 22, Q trains are rerouted via the R line in both directions between Canal Street and DeKalb Avenue due to general maintenance and prep work on the Manhattan Bridge prior to the Montague tube shutdown. Q trains will stop at City Hall, Cortlandt Street, Rector Street, Whitehall Street, Court Street and Jay Street-MetroTech.


From 10:45 p.m. Friday, July 19 to 5 a.m. Monday, July 22, Manhattan-bound Q trains run express from Sheepshead Bay to Prospect Park due to track panel installation at Sheepshead Bay. Note: At all times until December 2013, Manhattan-bound Q platforms at Cortelyou Road, Beverley Road and Parkside Avenue are closed for station component work.


From 5:15 a.m. to midnight, Saturday, July 20 and Sunday, July 21, due to general maintenance and prep work on the Manhattan Bridge prior to the Montague tube shutdown, R trains are rerouted in both directions as follows:

  • Via the D line between DeKalb Avenue and Broadway-Lafayette Street
  • Via the M line between Broadway-Lafayette Street and Queens Plaza

N and Q trains make R stops between DeKalb Avenue and 57th Street-7th Avenue during this time.


From 6 a.m. to 11 p.m. Saturday, July 20 and Sunday, July 21, Bay Ridge-bound R trains run express from Atlantic Avenue-Barclays Center to 36th Street due to track tie renewal at Union Street.

12 comments
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
AsidesMetro-NorthService Advisories

Hudson Line freight train derailment still messing everything up for everyone

by Benjamin Kabak
written by Benjamin Kabak on July 19, 2013

Late last night, a CSX freight using Metro-North’s Hudson Line to tote away some garbage derailed across both tracks near the Spuyten Duyvil station in the Bronx, and service into Manhattan on the Hudson Line has been suspended since then. As of this afternoon, train service along the line remains suspended “until further notice,” the MTA announced.

As alternate routes go, the Harlem Line will be honoring Hudson Line tickets and LAZ parking permits. Hudson Line train service is operating only between Poughkeepsie and Yonkers with a shuttle bus offering service to the 1 train’s northern terminal at Van Cortlandt Park-242nd Street. For anyone hoping to take a Hudson Line train to tonight’s Jay-Z/Justin Timberlake concert at Yankee Stadium, reconsider those plans. It’s a giant mess.

13 comments
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
PANYNJ

Why the PATH Hub isn’t a new Grand Central

by Benjamin Kabak
written by Benjamin Kabak on July 19, 2013

An occulus arises. (Photo via @WTCProgress)

With great restraint, I haven’t written too much about the $4 billion World Trade Center PATH Hub over the past five weeks, but the Port Authority decided to take some reporters for a tour earlier this week. The resulting coverage has been particularly impressive for, on the one hand, its sweeping proclamations of success for a project two years away from opening and, on the other, for its sheer skepticism that this thing was worth building. Stuck in the middle was an entirely inapt comparison to Grand Central by none other than The New York Times.

The story in The Times takes the Port Authority party line hook, line and sinker, at least for its first half. Carrying the headline “A Transit Hub in the Making May Prove to Be the Grandest,” David Dunlap’s piece foresees the PATH Hub as Grand Central South. With a lede that calls Grand Central an “enduring landmark” and “a portal to the city that has never lost its power to inspire awe,” Dunlap wonders if the PATH Hub can do the same:

If the World Trade Center Transportation Hub is ever to emerge from under the shadow of its $3.94 billion price tag (double Grand Central’s, adjusted for inflation), it will have to do more than move PATH commuters efficiently. It will have to lift hearts. Perhaps it can.

A visit to the monumental station on Wednesday left the impression that its main transit hall may be the most hopeful element at the trade center complex when it opens in 2015. Now full of light and air, it will one day be full of people, movement and life, as well. It could become a destination in its own right, even for those who are not among the 200,000 or so commuters traveling daily to and from New Jersey.

The transportation hub and retail concourses will be “the only facilities on site that are completely accessible to the public,” said a report by the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey, which is building the hub. By contrast, visitors to the office towers, the National September 11 Memorial Museum and the 1 World Trade Center observatory will be subject to tight scrutiny.

In the end, that may be the most astonishing feature of the hub; that a structure of such colossal proportions should be devoted to unobstructed public use. The main transit hall is 365 feet long — a block and a half — making it 90 feet longer than the main concourse of Grand Central Terminal. It is 115 feet wide, or just 5 feet narrower than the Grand Central concourse. It takes a half minute to walk from one side to the other.

Now to be fair to Dunlap, he spends the second half of the article talking about the project’s ever-increasing cost which has essentially doubled since plans were first unveiled. He also accepts PATH’s estimate that 200,000 people will traipse through the hub daily without much of a second-guess. Currently, PATH’s total daily ridership is only around 260,000, and not all of those riders pass through the World Trade Center stop. A new hub — without added track or tunnel capacity — won’t deliver too many more riders.

So is the PATH Hub positioned to be a new Grand Central? Not by a long shot. The current iteration of Grand Central was built by a private entity to uniform rail operations in New York, electrify the tracks and restore Park Avenue to the people of the city as opposed to its trains. It contains 123 tracks — 46 with platforms — and will soon see a marked increase when East Side Access, at a cost of just twice the PATH Hub, will bring in another eight tracks of LIRR service. The PATH Hub, as an underground mall, may rival Grand Central in its grandeur, but as a train station, it falls far short.

Even still, some of those who saw the station in progress this week walked away far more skeptically than The Times did. Steve Cuozzo of The Post was one of those columnists casting stones on the half-completed transit hub. The structure is an architectural marvel, he says, but “is this pet project of the PA’s New Jersey side worth it?”

The Hub’s so big, complicated and densely packed with everything all around, it made three skyscrapers and the Memorial much harder and costlier to build.

And how many will use it? More than 250,000 daily, PA construction chief Steve Plate said yesterday. Skeptics say as few as 50,000, mostly Jersey commuters. The project adds no new track, only endless underground corridors for walking from here to there. Isn’t that what city streets are for?

In an age with limited dollars available for transit and a glaring need to add capacity, have we spent wisely? Can’t we build great public spaces that inspire civic pride without flushing cash down the drain? At the former Ground Zero site, apparently not.

159 comments
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
Newer Posts
Older Posts