Home Author
Author

Benjamin Kabak

AsidesNew Jersey Transit

Great Moments in NJ Transit: It costs what to build a fence?

by Benjamin Kabak
written by Benjamin Kabak on February 27, 2013

Every now and then — or let’s be honest, rather regularly — stories come out about New Jersey Transit that remind us of just how inept the agency can be. Lately, seemingly everyone has escaped responsibility for leaving rolling stock in an area vulnerable to floods as a giant hurricane came in, and despite a $450 million repair bill, Gov. Chris Christie has yet to fire anyone in charge. But there’s more to New Jersey Transit’s problems than that.

On a smaller scale, even mundane stories are a cause for concern. Take, for instance, New Jersey Transit’s decision, after decades of ignoring the problem, to close up a shortcut. For decades, Manhattan-bound riders walking to the Teterboro station were faced with a tough choice: Walk a mile on Route 46, a dangerous road with no shoulder or sidewalks or cross the tracks, an otherwise illegal maneuver that NJ Transit had tacitly approved. That approval ended recently when the NJ Transit built a fence. Officials cited “safety” as the primary concern which is laughable if you consider the remaining access options. It might be “safer” for New Jersey Transit’s exposure to liability, but it’s not safer for the people walking to the train station.

We could debate the best way to solve this problem for a while. Maybe an underpass would work or an overpass, but for now, New Jersey Transit has gone with a fence. And just how much does this fence cost? According to the NorthJersey.com report, NJT will spend $100,000 to build a fence eight feet high and 300 feet long. One hundred thousand dollars. It blows the mind. According to a fencing cost estimate site, installing 300 linear feet of chain-link fence in Teterboro, New Jersey, should cost a little over $5000. Instead, New Jersey Transit is going to spend twenty times that amount. No wonder it’s impossible to have a rational discussion on expanding the region’s transit network.

51 comments
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
MTA Politics

Observer: Get on with it already, Cuomo

by Benjamin Kabak
written by Benjamin Kabak on February 27, 2013

It’s been a while since the MTA had any permanent leadership. Joe Lhota, the current mayoral candidate, vacated his position on the final day of 2012, and since then, leadership duties have been split between an interim board chair who doens’t want the job on a full-time basis and the current president of New York City Transit. With Sandy repair dollars flowing in, a union contract negotiation that’s stalled and a looming five-year capital plan that will soon require attention, now isn’t the time to let the MTA become an afterthought.

That, though, is what Gov. Andrew Cuomo is seemingly doing. Tasked with finding a replacement to head up the MTA, Cuomo has made no overtures to the usual suspects, and now, outside observers are starting to take note. In today’s Observer, the paper’s editorial board calls upon Cuomo to do something about it already. With no search committee in place, it seems as though Cuomo, the paper says, “has shown little interest in finding a new chair for the MTA in a timely manner.” The governor’s office says otherwise, but actions speak louder than words. Right now, there are no actions.

The Observer makes a compelling case for movement on the MTA:

Mr. Cuomo has had his hands full since Superstorm Sandy, but the leadership of the MTA is no small matter. The agency will soon begin to spend nearly $5 billion in federal recovery dollars in Sandy’s aftermath, so priorities—and oversight—must be established. The MTA’s largest union, Local 100 of the Transit Workers Union, has been working without a contract for more than a year, and there have been no talks in four months.

Mr. Cuomo has been down this road before. He allowed vacancies on the board of the Long Island Power Authority to pile up—there were six slots awaiting his action when Sandy hit in late October. The agency’s acting CEO was filling in until Mr. Cuomo appointed a new, permanent chief. LIPA’s scandalously slow response to Sandy’s aftermath was the result of lethargic leadership and absent oversight.

Inaction can have consequences. While the MTA’s customers may not notice the agency’s leadership void at the moment, it’s just a matter of time. The MTA needs permanent leadership. Mr. Cuomo should put together a search committee consisting of all interested parties and get the process moving. This is one delay commuters shouldn’t have to endure.

The fares are going up this weekend. Complaints will rise. No one is in charge. While burning through more than a handful of various CEOs, Chairmen and Executive Directors since 2006, the MTA has been subjected to the ever-shifting whims of the men and women who have served atop the organization. It is time for Cuomo to find a successor and one who will stick with it for more than a year at a time.

28 comments
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
AsidesBuses

On the need for Chinatown buses, briefly

by Benjamin Kabak
written by Benjamin Kabak on February 26, 2013

The Chinatown buses that have proliferated over the past few decades maintain an interesting place in the scheme of regional transit. Operating out off the sidewalks of northeast Chinatowns, these buses are not known for their safety, but they provide cheap rides between New York, Philadelphia, Boston, Washington, D.C., and points further afield. Some may scoff at the way the chaotic boarding process crowds the sidewalk and frown at the way idling buses pollute the neighborhoods. But these vehicles serve a purpose if we want, as Cap’n Transit has shown, trips at every price and level of luxury.

Yet, even as we acknowledge the Chinatown buses, these vehicles pose serious problems. With low cost comes low safety, and many Chinatown buses have pulled off the roads by federal safety regulators. Today, Fung Wah, one of the more popular low-cost providers for the Boston-to-New York route, was ordered off the road by the feds due to serious concerns over vehicle integrity. With that move, very few big-name Chinatown bus companies remain untouched.

The coverage of the Fung Wah safety story has been peculiar from certain corners. J.K. Trotter, writing for The Atlantic Cities wrote a post that seemed to be mocking the Chinatown buses and deriding any remaining riders. Now, safety is a serious concern, but so too is maintaining the array of intercity travel options if we are to encourage transit usage. Somehow, we have to figure out how to provide cheap, reliable and safe intercity travel without looking down upon those who opt for the least expensive solution.

35 comments
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
TWU

TWU Sticking Point: Overtime bus drivers

by Benjamin Kabak
written by Benjamin Kabak on February 26, 2013

Even as the MTA and TWU seemingly get nowhere in their ongoing labor negotiations, a few key issues have risen to the top of the agenda. While calls for unnecessary, costly and useless subway slowdowns have garnered headlines, issues concerning part-time employees have become contentions. The MTA wants to cut overtime pay by instituting part-time bus drivers while the TWU objects strenuously to such a plan.

Esme Deprez of Bloomberg breaks down the conflict:

The biggest U.S. transit agency’s proposal to use part-time bus drivers to cut costs is one of the most contentious points in contract talks now in their second year with its largest bargaining unit. The plan is part of a package of measures, including three years of no wage increases, that union leaders hope to derail when they send hundreds of workers to swarm the offices of lawmakers in Albany next month.

Leaders of Transport Workers Union Local 100 say allowing an army of part-time drivers would shrink paychecks, threaten public safety and harm the economic stability of families. “There’s no such thing as a part-time family or a part- time mortgage,” said Jim Gannon, a TWU spokesman. “If some schmuck wants to work part-time, go get a job at Best Buy.”

…Mass transit, especially in metropolitan areas, requires the most vehicles and workers during morning and evening rush hours to meet demand. Work rules that the MTA calls “outdated” require eight-hour shifts. During midday lulls, workers are often paid even when they’re not driving. Shifts lasting more than eight hours can’t be broken up between multiple employees, forcing the MTA to pay one worker overtime to do the whole thing. One bus driver with a base pay of $55,994 in 2009 more than doubled his take-home with $70,473 in overtime pay, according to a 2010 audit by state Comptroller Thomas DiNapoli.

In 2010, overtime cost the MTA $560 million for the extra wages, or 13 percent of payroll, the equivalent of employing an extra 7,000 full-time workers, according to the authority. This year, it budgeted $506 million. Toll and fare increases that take effect in March are expected to bring in only $450 million a year.

The TWU has framed the debate in terms of both job security and safety. It’s tougher for union members to make ends meet with only one job if some members are working only part-time jobs, and union leaders allege that part-time workers will not “abide by agency policy requiring approval of outside employment and sufficient rest between shifts.”

The MTA, meanwhile, says shifting some bus drivers to part-time status could save $13 million annually. It’s a small amount in the grand scheme of the MTA’s budget but would both represent work-rule reform and highlight a serious commitment to shaving labor dollars. Right now, though, the issue is just lingering — as are the overall contract negotiations — until some middle ground can be found. As usual, without real labor reform that goes well beyond full- and part-time distinctions, riders will pay, one way or another.

54 comments
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
Service Advisories

FASTRACK arrives in Washington Heights tonight

by Benjamin Kabak
written by Benjamin Kabak on February 25, 2013

Screen Shot 2013-02-25 at 9.44.47 PM

You can take the A if you want to get to Harlem, but from 10 p.m. to 5 a.m. each night this week, you can’t take the A train to get to Inwood. FASTRACK arrives shortly in upper Manhattan, and the A train won’t operate north of 168th Street.

This one’s pretty easy: Take the 1 train to nearby stations or take the M4 bus for direct service to the A train stations. Next up is an overnight closure on the IND from 53rd St. to Roosevelt Ave., but that’s not until mid-March.

11 comments
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
AsidesMTA Politics

Not commiting to much of anything at a transit forum

by Benjamin Kabak
written by Benjamin Kabak on February 25, 2013

Some of the city’s august candidates for mayor gathered on Friday at a union-sponsored forum on transit issues. I wasn’t invited to cover the event, and I believe that’s due to my stridently anti-TWU stance in recent years. That’s neither here nor there though as according to reports form the event, I didn’t miss all together too much. In other words, the current crop of mayoral candidates — with one glaring exception — are comfortable proposing solutions that won’t happen to problems they can’t control.

Stephen Miller from Streetsblog, Zach Stieber of The Epoch Times and Matt Flegenheimer of The Times all filed reports from the event. The themes were, by and large, familiar: Boo congestion pricing, boo increasing city contributions to transit operations, hooray commuter tax, hooray ferries and buses. The commuter tax is a non-starter in that any mayoral candidate can support it without risking political liability or any action. Buses and ferries are pieces to a larger puzzle that requires Albany action and forward-thinking policies.

One candidate has been calling for more city control of the MTA though. Sal Albanese, a long-shot Democratic challenger, wants the city to have tighter control of its subways and buses, and he recently unveiled a transportation plan explaining why. Christine Quinn and Tom Allon have both made noises around city control over the MTA, but politicians with their hopes on Gracie Mansion know that the MTA can be a political hot potato. Ultimately, the next mayor can help speed up transit innovation by shortening the amount of time it gets for NYC DOT to roll out new bus lanes and by spearheading a true BRT movement. Otherwise, without challenging the current political structure, it will be business as usual for the MTA, Albany and City Hall, no matter who becomes the next mayor.

11 comments
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
MetroCard

A rudderless project to replace the outdated MetroCard

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

Let’s think about the MetroCard not as an individualized piece of plastic you have to swipe through a turnstile for entry into the subway. Let’s instead think about it as a computer system from the early 1990s that relies upon four magnetic contact points and a flimsy piece of prickly plastic. Are you still using your Macintosh LC? What about Windows 3? Are you surprised then, as I often am, that this piece of transportation technology still works, let alone reasonably well?

Of course, the MetroCard, a closed system from 20 years ago, doesn’t work on its own. The MTA spends millions of dollars each year maintaining and attempting to upgrade this clunky system, and the MTA spends millions of dollars each year purchasing reams of new MetroCards. It is, evidently, an inefficient technology leftover from twenty years ago, and the MTA has tried to replace it.

They’ve failed spectacularly. The agency has spent nearly a decade attempting to identify a potential replacement even as other transit agencies manage to adapt smartcard-based, contactless, RFID solutions to the fare payment problem. At first, it seemed as though a credit/debit card-based solution would arrive by 2015, but by the end of January, we learned any plans to replace the MetroCards are unformed and three to five years away. With steady turnover atop the MTA and no champion, a MetroCard replacement program seems to be foundering.

So what’s the problem here? Why can’t the MTA just do what they’ve done in D.C, Boston, London and countless other cities? Well, the MTA wants to be a leader in the field while cutting down on fare-collection costs and finding a technology that will work for the next two decades and beyond, but it doesn’t know what that collection is. Time and again, we’ve seen how the MTA isn’t particularly good at technology, and although the agency has shown improvement in certain areas over the years, the MetroCard is starting to stick out like a sore thumb.

The Times today weighs in on the issue as Matt Flegenheimer tried to get to the bottom of the MetroCard mess. He doesn’t hold back:

Agency officials now concede that the MetroCard, which the authority had once hoped to phase out as early as 2012, is not going anywhere anytime soon, despite the rising cost of maintaining the system. And no one is quite sure what will replace it.

At an authority committee meeting last month, officials suggested that a single unfortunate bet had disrupted the project: While other transit agencies invested in contactless payment systems that they would construct themselves, the authority had hoped to evade the burden and cost of building its own. So the agency planned to replace MetroCards with riders’ own contactless bank cards, embedded with computer chips to facilitate fare payment without a swipe. But banks did not issue the cards widely enough in recent years, officials said, scuttling a plan to introduce a new system as early as 2012….

The authority said a new system would be put into effect within three to five years. Any further delay could prove perilous; officials have said that the current MetroCard system cannot be maintained beyond 2019. Michael DeVitto, the vice president and program executive for fare payment programs at New York City Transit, said there was “no linkage” between the estimates for the new system and the expected breakdown of the MetroCard. He said he could not “envision any scenario” in which the authority would spend more money to extend the MetroCard’s stay.

Mr. DeVitto said the authority still expected to avoid building its own system, and would rely instead on a third-party device. But it is unclear what form that might take. Options the authority has mentioned recently, besides a smart card, include a key fob or a cellphone payment system. The authority will also need to accommodate riders without access to bank cards or cellphones. “We’re still working that out,” Mr. DeVitto said.

“We’re still working it out” has been the party line through countless pilot programs, restructurings of the new fare payment technology group and numerous MTA heads. Meanwhile, even Philadelphia where SPETA could set records for its ineptitude and still uses tokens, is moving forward with a contactless system. They even have a timeline!

The bottom line is that the MTA is stuck. They’re racing against time and money but are basically starting out at the beginning. Most of us have gone through six or seven computers since Windows 3 and our Mac LCs, but the MTA has theirs powering the entire fare payment system. It’s expensive to run, expensive to maintain and obsolete. But tomorrow morning, I’ll still swipe through, hoping not to be told to please swipe again.

81 comments
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
Service Advisories

Weekend work impacting 13 subway lines

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

You know the drill.


From 3:45 a.m. Saturday, February 23 to 9 p.m. Sunday, February 24, uptown 1 trains skip 225th Street, 231st Street and 238th Street due to track panel installation north of 231st Street.


From 7:30 a.m. to 6:30 p.m., Saturday, February 23 and Sunday, February 24, the last stop for some uptown 1 trains is 137th Street due to track panel installation north of 231st Street in the Bronx.


From 11:30 p.m. Friday, February 22 to 5 a.m. Monday, February 25, there are no 2 trains between 3rd Avenue-149th Street and 96th Street due to station work at 149th Street-Grand concourse, track maintenance at 96th Street and tunnel lighting in the Harlem River tube. Downtown 2 trains operate local between 96th Street and Times Square-42nd Street.

Free shuttle buses operate:

  • Non-stop – Between 96th Street and 3rd Avenue-149th Street
  • Local – Between 96th Street and 3rd Avenue-149th Street

During this time, 2 trains will operate in two sections:

  • Between 241st Street and 3rd Avenue-149th Street
  • Between 96th Street and Flatbush Avenue


From 11:30 p.m. Friday, February 22 to 5 a.m. Monday, February 25, 3 service is suspended due to station work at 149th Street-Grand Concourse, track maintenance at 96th Street and tunnel lighting in the Harlem River tube. 2 trains make all 3 station stops between 96th Street and Franklin Avenue. 4 trains make all 3 station stops between Franklin Avenue and New Lots Avenue. Free shuttle bus operates as a local between 96th Street and 148th Street.


From 11:30 p.m. Friday, February 22 to 5 a.m. Monday, February 25, 4 service is extended to New Lots Avenue and operates as a local in Brooklyn due to work on the 2, 3, 5 line.

(Overnights)
From 11:45 p.m. Friday, February 22 to 6:30 a.m. Saturday, February 23, from 11:45 p.m. Saturday, February 23 to 6:30 a.m. Sunday, February 24 and from 11:45 p.m. Sunday, February 24 to 5 a.m. Monday, February 25, downtown 4 trains run express from 125th Street to Grand Central-42nd Street due to track tie block work near 96th Street and 103rd Street.


From 6 a.m. to 11 p.m., Saturday, February 23 and Sunday, February 24, there are no 5 trains between East 180th Street and 149th Street-Grand Concourse due to station work at 149th Street-Grand Concourse, track maintenance at 96th Street and tunnel lighting in the Harlem River tube.

Free shuttle bus operates across 149th Street between 3rd Avenue-149th Street and 149th Street-Grand Concourse. 5 train service operates in two sections:

  • Between Dyre Avenue and East 180th Street
  • Between 149th Street-Grand Concourse and Bowling Green (every 20 minutes)

Note: 5 trains from Manhattan skip 138th Street-Grand Concourse, take the 4 instead.


From 11:45 p.m. Friday, February 22 to 5 a.m. Monday, February 25, downtown 6 trains run express from 125th Street to Grand Central-42nd Street due to track tie block work near 96th Street and 103rd Street.


From 11:45 p.m. Friday, February 22 to 5 a.m. Monday, February 25 (and the next four weekends), there is no 7 train service between Times Square-42nd Street and Queensboro Plaza due to Flushing Line CBTC work. Customers may take the E, N, Q and S (42nd Street shuttle) and free shuttle buses as alternatives.

  • Use the E, N or Q* between Manhattan and Queens
  • Free shuttle buses operate between Vernon Blvd-Jackson Avenue and Queensboro Plaza
  • In Manhattan, the 42nd Street S Shuttle operates overnight

*Q service is extended to Ditmars Blvd. (See Q entry for hours of operation.)


From 12:01 a.m. Saturday, February 23 to 5 a.m. Monday, February 25, Queens-bound A trains run local from Hoyt-Schermerhorn Sts to Utica Avenue due to platform edge and tile work at Utica Avenue.

(Overnights)
From 11:15 p.m. Friday, February 22 to 6:30 a.m. Saturday, February 23, from 11:15 p.m. Saturday, February 23 to 6:30 a.m. Sunday, February 24 and from 11:15 p.m. Sunday, February 24 to 5 a.m. Monday, February 25, Manhattan-bound E trains run express from Forest Hills-71st Avenue to Roosevelt Avenue due to ADA work at Forest Hills-71st Avenue.


From 10:45 p.m. Friday, February 22 to 5 a.m. Monday, February 25, Queens-bound N trains run express from Canal Street to 34th Street-Herald Square due to electrical work at 14th Street-Union Square and 34th Street-Herald Square.


From 6:30 a.m. to midnight, Saturday, February 23 and Sunday, February 24, Queens-bound R trains run express from Canal Street to 34th Street-Herald Square due to electrical work at 14th Street-Union Square and 34th Street-Herald Square.


From 6:30 a.m. to midnight, Saturday, February 23 and Sunday, February 24, Manhattan-bound R trains run express from Forest Hills-71st Avenue to Roosevelt Avenue due to ADA work at Forest Hills-71st Avenue.


From 7 a.m. to 9 p.m., Saturday, February 23 and from 9 a.m. to 7 p.m. Sunday, February 24, Q trains are extended to Ditmars Blvd. in order to augment service between Manhattan and Queens.

(42nd Street Shuttle) (Overnights)
From 12:01 a.m. to 6 a.m. Saturday, February 23, Sunday, February 24, Monday, February 25, and Monday, February 25, 42nd Street S shuttle operates overnight due to weekend work on the 7 line.

18 comments
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
MTA Politics

Two months later, Albany silent on Lhota’s replacement

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

Later tonight, the various mayoral candidates bumbling their ways to an election later this year will meet tonight at the CUNY Murphy Institute for Worker Education and Labor Studies for a panel on transit issues. Co-hosted by the TWU, the panel lineup is actually intriguing because no one invited Joe Lhota to speak. A GOP frontrunner in the mayoral race and the one-time MTA head hadn’t heard about the panel until Tuesday night when another candidate mentioned it to him. It seems strange to leave out the former MTA Chairman and CEO from the panel.

Leaving out transit, though, is nothing new in political circles, and speaking of Lhota, his absence atop the MTA still looms large. It’s been two months since he announced his intentions to step down, and there has been absolutely no sign of action on a replacement from Albany. The MTA is operating with an interim chairman who doesn’t want the position on any sort of full-time basis and an interim executive director also tasked with overseeing New York City Transit. Meanwhile, the TWU is still operating without a contract; the next five-year capital plan will soon need a champion; the Sandy recovery effort is attempting to move forward; and the MetroCard replacement project is stuck.

So what’s Albany’s response to this? As Jim O’Grady as Transportation Nation wrote today, absolutely nothing:

Two months have passed since now-mayoral candidate Joe Lhota resigned as chairman and CEO of the NY Metropolitan Transportation Authority. So what do we know about his replacement, the man or woman who will face a raft of problems, once that person is chosen by New York Governor Andrew Cuomo to lead the nation’s largest transit agencies? “Nothing, nada, zip, zero,” said Gene Russianoff of the Straphangers Campaign. “I haven’t heard.”

Other transportation advocates say the same. At one time, those advocates would have known by now what was happening. That time was September 2011, two months after Lhota’s predecessor, Jay Walder, resigned from the NY MTA’s top spot. A search committee made up of advocates and governmental veterans was, by the end of those two months, wrapping up interviews for Walder’s replacement. The committee recommended Lhota, whom Cuomo named head of the NY MTA in October of 2011. Three months later, the state senate confirmed him in the post…

But this time around, there is little urgency in the search for his replacement. The governor has not courted fanfare in announcing the formation of a search committee, as he did before. Instead, a Cuomo official blamed distractions from Sandy and an Albany budget fight for the fact that “there will be no announcement soon” about a new transit chief. Cuomo spokesman Matt Wing would only add that, “The administration continues to actively search for a new chairman.”

It’s more of the same from Cuomo who hasn’t done anything to prioritize transit during his tenure. The MTA needs a strong leader with some permanence behind the position, and right now, facing myriad challenges, New York City’s transportation lifeline has been cast somewhat adrift. The state is failing the city right now, and it doesn’t sound as though a resolution is in sight.

11 comments
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
AsidesBrooklyn

Promised line review a small step forward for the G train

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

Over the past few years, as G train ridership has grown, calls to improve service have as well. Lately, the Riders Alliance — an organization for which I sit on the board — with the support of State Senators Daniel Squadron and Martin Malavé Dilan has urged politicians and the MTA to improve G train service, and after Squadron and Dilan requested that the transit agency at least give the line the courtesy of a review, the MTA will oblige.

As Reuven Blau of The Daily News reports today, the MTA has promised to conduct an examination of the G train. As it did with the F and L trains before, the MTA will try to assess the G experience while looking for ways to improve the line and attract more riders. While the station infrastructure along the IND Crosstown line leaves much to be desired, even some small fixes — such as free out-of-system transfers — could ease rider complaints. The MTA anticipates releasing the results of the line review at the end of June.

“G train riders spoke. Now, this Full Line Review will give us real answers to lead to real changes,” Squadron, an influential voice in Albany for transit, said. “Working together in the past, we’ve made dramatic improvements throughout the system — including first-of-their-kind Full Line Reviews that led to better F and L train service. The MTA deserves great credit for its willingness to continue working together toward the reliable service G train riders deserve. Thank you to Senator Dilan, our colleagues, and the Riders Alliance for their continued advocacy.”

Of course, as I’ve noted before, the G train suffers from a chicken-and-egg problem. By not investing in G train service, the MTA stifles ridership, but then, the agency points to low ridership as a reason for not investing in the service. If a study finds demand warrants more frequent trains, longer train sets or even these out-of-system transfers, hopefully, the MTA can find the money needed to improve service. As John Raskin, executive director of the Riders Alliance said, “The MTA is severely underfunded and we know that. In the meantime, we want to identify common-sense solutions to make the train-riding experience better.” And if there’s one thing lacking from New York’s transit planning approach these days, it is common sense.

41 comments
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
Newer Posts
Older Posts